TY - JOUR
T1 - Reliable assessment of operative performance
AU - Bilgic, Elif
AU - Watanabe, Yusuke
AU - McKendy, Katherine
AU - Munshi, Amani
AU - Ito, Yoichi M.
AU - Fried, Gerald M.
AU - Feldman, Liane S.
AU - Vassiliou, Melina C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/2/1
Y1 - 2016/2/1
N2 - Background There is no consensus regarding the number of intraoperative assessments required to reliably measure trainee performance. This study used generalizability theory (GT) to describe factors contributing to score variance and to estimate the number of assessments needed to achieve high standards of reliability. Methods While performing laparoscopic procedures, trainees were assessed by the attending surgeon using Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS). Data were collected prospectively (2-month intervals), assessing each trainee multiple times. Reliability coefficient was calculated using trainees, cases, and raters as factors. Results Eighteen trainees were included for a total of 65 assessments. Total variance in scores was accounted for as follows: 66.1% by trainees, 31.6% by the interaction between trainees and cases, and 2.3% by raters. At least 3 cases are required for reliable scores using GOALS. Conclusions Trainees accounted for most of the variance in GOALS scores with a minimum of 3 cases required to improve the reliability of the scores obtained. These data may guide the implementation of performance assessments in surgical training programs.
AB - Background There is no consensus regarding the number of intraoperative assessments required to reliably measure trainee performance. This study used generalizability theory (GT) to describe factors contributing to score variance and to estimate the number of assessments needed to achieve high standards of reliability. Methods While performing laparoscopic procedures, trainees were assessed by the attending surgeon using Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS). Data were collected prospectively (2-month intervals), assessing each trainee multiple times. Reliability coefficient was calculated using trainees, cases, and raters as factors. Results Eighteen trainees were included for a total of 65 assessments. Total variance in scores was accounted for as follows: 66.1% by trainees, 31.6% by the interaction between trainees and cases, and 2.3% by raters. At least 3 cases are required for reliable scores using GOALS. Conclusions Trainees accounted for most of the variance in GOALS scores with a minimum of 3 cases required to improve the reliability of the scores obtained. These data may guide the implementation of performance assessments in surgical training programs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84955575341&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84955575341&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.10.008
DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.10.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 26679826
AN - SCOPUS:84955575341
SN - 0002-9610
VL - 211
SP - 426
EP - 430
JO - American Journal of Surgery
JF - American Journal of Surgery
IS - 2
ER -