Keele University School of Medicine Reliability of the L eicester C linical procedure A ssessment T ool (LCAT), a tool to support holistic generic assessment of clinical procedure skills RK McKinley, J Strand, L Schuwirth T Gray, T Alun-Jones, H Miller
Keele University School of Medicine Background Assessment –Repertoire of competence Micro-certification –Changing roles Skills extension Skills cascade –Volume –Implications for assessment
Keele University School of Medicine Instrument specification Generic Holistic Multi-professional Multi-level Multi-modal Enable high quality assessment: –reliable, valid, acceptable, feasible, educational impact Nationally accredited
Keele University School of Medicine Methods Multi stage: –Systematic review –Qualitative development –National validation –Psychometrics –Implementation
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 1: Systematic review LCAT v1.7
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 2: Qualitative Focus groups Observed assessments, debrief interviews Trial ‘hi-fi’ OSCE LCAT v2.5
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 3: Delphi National sampling frame –Recruitment –Questionnaire Definition of consensus Agreement –Categories: All >95% –Components: All >89% LCAT v3.0
Keele University School of Medicine LCAT v3.0 Category –Communication and working with the patient –Safety –Infection Prevention –Procedural Competence –Team working Components
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics Hi-fi OSCE –8 stations (2X3 tracks) Prosthetics + simulator Venepuncture, venous cannulation, IV drugs, ABG, ♀&♂ urinary catheterisation, skin suture, ECG ‘Prep station’ 15 minutes + 5 feedback
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics Analysis –Used data from 1 assessor per station –Assessors not systematically assigned to stations –Variable group of assessors –Unbalanced design
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics Analysis –P (candidate) –S (stations) –A:(PS) assessors within candidates x stations –PS,e interaction candidates and stations + error
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics 46 candidates 50 assessors –19 medical –27 nurses –1 midwife –3 HCA
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics Results: variance EffectDfVariance component % of total variance P (candidates) S (stations) PS,e (candidate x stations plus general error) A:PS (assessors within candidates x stations)
Keele University School of Medicine Stage 4: Psychometrics Results: D analysis N stations N Assessors
Keele University School of Medicine Summary Generic Holistic Multi-professional Multi-level Multi-modal Enable high quality assessment: –reliable, valid, acceptable, feasible, educational impact Nationally accredited
Keele University School of Medicine Summary Generic Holistic Multi-professional Multi-level Multi-modal Quality: –reliable, valid, acceptable, feasible, educational impact Nationally accredited
Keele University School of Medicine Acknowledgements Analysis: –Ron Hoogenboom, Cees van der Vleuten and Arno Muijtjens Colleagues: –Linda Ward, Clinical Librarian UHL –University Hospitals of Leicester –Eastern Leicester PCT –Students and staff University of Leicester De Montfort University Funding: –Nation Health Service University –Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland WDC
Keele University School of Medicine