| Title |
Development of performance and error metrics for ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s128963 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Osman M Ahmed, Brian D O’Donnell, Anthony G Gallagher, George D Shorten |
| Abstract |
Change in the landscape of medical education coupled with a paradigm shift toward outcome-based training mandates the trainee to demonstrate specific predefined performance benchmarks in order to progress through training. A valid and reliable assessment tool is a prerequisite for this process. The objective of this study was to characterize ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block to develop performance and error metrics and to verify face and content validity using a modified Delphi method. A metric group (MG) was established, which comprised three expert regional anesthesiologists, an experimental psychologist and a trained facilitator. The MG deconstructed ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block to identify and define performance and error metrics. Experts reviewed five video recordings of the procedure performed by anesthesiologists with different levels of expertise to aid task deconstruction. Subsequently, the MG subjected the metrics to "stress testing", a process to ascertain the extent to which the performance and error metrics could be scored objectively, either occurring or not occurring with a high degree of reliability. Ten experienced regional anesthesiologists used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on the metrics. Fifty-four performance metrics, organized in six procedural phases and characterizing ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block and 32 error metrics (nine categorized as critical) were identified and defined. Based on the Delphi panel consensus, one performance metric was modified, six deleted and three added. In this study, we characterized ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block to develop performance and error metrics as a prerequisite for outcome-based training and assessment. Delphi consensus verified face and content validity. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 48% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2017.
All research outputs
#23,100,963
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,463
of 324,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them