Construct and face validity of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise

Nabeel A. Arain, Deborah C. Hogg, Rajiv B. Gala, Ravi Bhoja, Seifu T. Tesfay, Erin M. Webb, Daniel J. Scott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Our aim was to develop an objective scoring system and evaluate construct and face validity for a laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise. Surgery and gynecology novices (n = 14) and experts (n = 10) participated. Assessments included the following: time-out, scenario decision making (SDM) score (based on essential treatments rendered and completion time), operating room communication assessment (investigator developed), line operations safety audits (teamwork), and National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationTask Load Index (workload). Significant differences were detected for SDM scores for scenarios 1 (192 vs 278; P =.01) and 3 (129 vs 225; P =.004), operating room communication assessment (67 vs 91; P =.002), and line operations safety audits (58 vs 87; P =.001), but not for time-out (46 vs 51) or scenario 2 SDM score (301 vs 322). Workload was similar for both groups and face validity (8.8 on a 10-point scale) was strongly supported. Objective decision-making scoring for 2 of 3 scenarios and communication and teamwork ratings showed construct validity. Face validity and participant feedback were excellent.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)54-62
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume203
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Fingerprint

Reproducibility of Results
Laparoscopy
Decision Making
Exercise
Communication
Operating Rooms
Workload
Safety
Gynecology
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • Communication
  • Crew resource management (CRM)
  • Laparoscopic troubleshooting
  • Patient safety
  • Simulation
  • Team training
  • Virtual operating room (VOR)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Construct and face validity of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise. / Arain, Nabeel A.; Hogg, Deborah C.; Gala, Rajiv B.; Bhoja, Ravi; Tesfay, Seifu T.; Webb, Erin M.; Scott, Daniel J.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 203, No. 1, 01.2012, p. 54-62.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1161ad6612ed457fb061b1bd9c410c92,
title = "Construct and face validity of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise",
abstract = "Our aim was to develop an objective scoring system and evaluate construct and face validity for a laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise. Surgery and gynecology novices (n = 14) and experts (n = 10) participated. Assessments included the following: time-out, scenario decision making (SDM) score (based on essential treatments rendered and completion time), operating room communication assessment (investigator developed), line operations safety audits (teamwork), and National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationTask Load Index (workload). Significant differences were detected for SDM scores for scenarios 1 (192 vs 278; P =.01) and 3 (129 vs 225; P =.004), operating room communication assessment (67 vs 91; P =.002), and line operations safety audits (58 vs 87; P =.001), but not for time-out (46 vs 51) or scenario 2 SDM score (301 vs 322). Workload was similar for both groups and face validity (8.8 on a 10-point scale) was strongly supported. Objective decision-making scoring for 2 of 3 scenarios and communication and teamwork ratings showed construct validity. Face validity and participant feedback were excellent.",
keywords = "Communication, Crew resource management (CRM), Laparoscopic troubleshooting, Patient safety, Simulation, Team training, Virtual operating room (VOR)",
author = "Arain, {Nabeel A.} and Hogg, {Deborah C.} and Gala, {Rajiv B.} and Ravi Bhoja and Tesfay, {Seifu T.} and Webb, {Erin M.} and Scott, {Daniel J.}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.08.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "203",
pages = "54--62",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Construct and face validity of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise

AU - Arain, Nabeel A.

AU - Hogg, Deborah C.

AU - Gala, Rajiv B.

AU - Bhoja, Ravi

AU - Tesfay, Seifu T.

AU - Webb, Erin M.

AU - Scott, Daniel J.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - Our aim was to develop an objective scoring system and evaluate construct and face validity for a laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise. Surgery and gynecology novices (n = 14) and experts (n = 10) participated. Assessments included the following: time-out, scenario decision making (SDM) score (based on essential treatments rendered and completion time), operating room communication assessment (investigator developed), line operations safety audits (teamwork), and National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationTask Load Index (workload). Significant differences were detected for SDM scores for scenarios 1 (192 vs 278; P =.01) and 3 (129 vs 225; P =.004), operating room communication assessment (67 vs 91; P =.002), and line operations safety audits (58 vs 87; P =.001), but not for time-out (46 vs 51) or scenario 2 SDM score (301 vs 322). Workload was similar for both groups and face validity (8.8 on a 10-point scale) was strongly supported. Objective decision-making scoring for 2 of 3 scenarios and communication and teamwork ratings showed construct validity. Face validity and participant feedback were excellent.

AB - Our aim was to develop an objective scoring system and evaluate construct and face validity for a laparoscopic troubleshooting team training exercise. Surgery and gynecology novices (n = 14) and experts (n = 10) participated. Assessments included the following: time-out, scenario decision making (SDM) score (based on essential treatments rendered and completion time), operating room communication assessment (investigator developed), line operations safety audits (teamwork), and National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationTask Load Index (workload). Significant differences were detected for SDM scores for scenarios 1 (192 vs 278; P =.01) and 3 (129 vs 225; P =.004), operating room communication assessment (67 vs 91; P =.002), and line operations safety audits (58 vs 87; P =.001), but not for time-out (46 vs 51) or scenario 2 SDM score (301 vs 322). Workload was similar for both groups and face validity (8.8 on a 10-point scale) was strongly supported. Objective decision-making scoring for 2 of 3 scenarios and communication and teamwork ratings showed construct validity. Face validity and participant feedback were excellent.

KW - Communication

KW - Crew resource management (CRM)

KW - Laparoscopic troubleshooting

KW - Patient safety

KW - Simulation

KW - Team training

KW - Virtual operating room (VOR)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83455258007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=83455258007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.08.010

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.08.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 22172483

AN - SCOPUS:83455258007

VL - 203

SP - 54

EP - 62

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 1

ER -