Key result
The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills tool demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.15 for overall performance) when assessing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia.
Why the study?
Does the DOPS assessment tool demonstrate reliability when used to score trainees performing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia?
Observational (n=49)
Does the DOPS assessment tool demonstrate reliability when used to score trainees performing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia?
The DOPS assessment tool demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability for evaluating ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia skills, suggesting it may not be adequate as a formative assessment tool in this setting.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
DOPS should not yet guide ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia assessments; leaves open development of reliable alternatives.
The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) form is used as a workplace-based assessment tool in the current Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists curriculum. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability of DOPS when used to score trainees performing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia. Reliability of an assessment tool is defined as the reproducibility of scores given by different assessors viewing the same trainee. Forty-nine anaesthetists were recruited to score two scripted videos of trainees performing a popliteal sciatic nerve block and an axillary brachial plexus block. Reliability, as measured by intraclass correlation coefficients, was -0.01 to 0.43 for the individual items in DOPS, and 0.15 for the 'Overall Performance for this Procedure' item. Assessors demonstrated consistency of scoring within DOPS, with significant correlation of sum of individual item scores with the 'Overall Performance for this Procedure' item (r=0.78 to 0.80, P<0.001), and with yes versus no responses to the 'Was the procedure completed satisfactorily?' item (W=24, P=0.0004, Video 1, and W=65, P=0.003, Video 2). While DOPS demonstrated a good degree of internal consistency in this setting, inter-rater reliability did not reach levels generally recommended for formative assessment tools. Feasibility of the form could be improved by removing the 'Was the procedure completed satisfactorily?' item without loss of information.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chuan et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia assessment (n=49). Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) assessment tool was evaluated on Reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients) for the 'Overall Performance for this Procedure' item (ICC 0.15). The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills tool demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.15 for overall performance) when assessing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: