Cognitive and Psychomotor Entrustable Professional Activities: Can Simulators Help Assess Competency in Trainees?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: An entrustable professional activity describes a professional task that postgraduate residents must master during their training. The use of simulation to assess performance of entrustable professional activities requires further investigation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is simulation-based assessment of resident performance of entrustable professional activities reliable? (2) Is there evidence of important differences between Postgraduate Year (PGY)-1 and PGY-4 residents when performing simulated entrustable professional activities? METHODS: Three entrustable professional activities were chosen from a list of competencies: management of the patient for total knee arthroplasty (TKA); management of the patient with an intertrochanteric hip fracture; and management of the patient with an ankle fracture. Each assessment of entrustable professional activity was 40 minutes long with three components: preoperative management of a patient (history-taking, examination, image interpretation); performance of a technical procedure on a sawbones model; and postoperative management of a patient (postoperative orders, management of complications). Residents were assessed by six faculty members who used checklists based on a modified Delphi technique, an overall global rating scale as well as a previously validated global rating scale for the technical procedure component of each activity. Nine PGY-1 and nine PGY-4 residents participated in our simulated assessment. We assessed reliability by calculating the internal consistency of the mean global rating for each activity as well as the interrater reliability between the faculty assessment and blinded review of videotaped encounters. We sought evidence of a difference in performance between PGY-1 and PGY-4 residents on the overall global rating scale for each station of each entrustable professional activity. RESULTS: The reliability (Cronbach's α) for the hip fracture activity was 0.88, it was 0.89 for the ankle fracture activity, and it was 0.84 for the TKA activity. A strong correlation was seen between blinded observer video review and faculty scores (mean 0.87 [0.07], p < 0.001). For the hip fracture entrustable professional activity, the PGY-4 group had a higher mean global rating scale than the PGY-1 group for preoperative management (3.56 [0.5] versus 2.33 [0.5], p < 0.001), postoperative management (3.67 [0.5] versus 2.22 [0.7], p < 0.001), and technical procedures (3.11 [0.3] versus 3.67 [0.5], p = 0.015). For the TKA activity, the PGY-4 group scored higher for postoperative management (3.5 [0.8] versus 2.67 [0.5], p = 0.016) and technical procedures (3.22 [0.9] versus 2.22 [0.9], p = 0.04) than the PGY-1 group, but no difference for preoperative management with the numbers available (PGY-4, 3.44 [0.7] versus PGY-1 2.89 [0.8], p = 0.14). For the ankle fracture activity, the PGY-4 group scored higher for postoperative management (3.22 [0.8] versus 2.33 [0.7], p = 0.18) and technical procedures (3.22 [1.2] versus 2.0 [0.7], p = 0.018) than the PGY-1 groups, but no difference for preoperative management with the numbers available (PGY-4, 3.22 [0.8] versus PGY-1, 2.78 [0.7], p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study show that simulated assessment of entrustable professional activities may be used to determine the ability of a resident to perform professional tasks that are critical components of medical training. In this manner, educators can ensure that competent performance of these skills in the simulated setting occurs before actual practice with patients in the clinical setting.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».