2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/622522
Category:
Full-text
Format:
Text-based Document
Type:
Presentation
Level of Evidence:
N/A
Research Approach:
N/A
Title:
Validation of “Time to Task” Performance Assessment Method in Simulation
Author(s):
Shinnick, Mary Ann; Woo, Mary A.
Lead Author STTI Affiliation:
Non-member
Author Details:
Mary Ann Shinnick, PhD, ACNP, CCNS, CHSE; Mary A. Woo, PhD
Abstract:

Background. Current methods to assess clinical performance are known to be often invalid and unreliable1. Therefore, we pilot tested an objective assessment of clinical competence, “Time to Task” (ability to perform specific activities within 5 minutes) and compared it to two other assessments, the Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric (Lasater) and the common “pass/fail” assessment (subjective measure of whether the subject would “pass” or “fail”).

Methods. Using a prospective, “Known Groups” (expert vs. novice nurses) design, Expert nurses (ICU nurses) and Novice nurses (senior prelicensure nursing students) participated individually in a simulation. Academic and clinical experts reviewed each video and scored each performance on two assessments while the third assessment, “Time to Task”, (key task elements to be completed in 5 minutes) was calculated from each video by the researcher. Statistical analysis consisted of T-Tests and Chi-square.

Results. Fourteen evaluators reviewed the videos. For “Time to Task”. There was strong statistical significance between the novice and expert groups (p < 0.01) and sensitivity (0.80) and specificity (0.85) were good. The Lasater (p < 0.01) only had sensitivity (0.72) and specificity (0.40) while “pass/fail”, sensitivity was high (0.90) but specificity was low (0.47) indicating an ability to identify “Expert” nurses but not “Novice” nurses.

Conclusion. “Time to Task” performed best as a measure of competency in simulation. While there have been similar objective measures in healthcare, they have not been adopted for assessment of clinical performance 2,3. One instrument is not appropriate for all assessment but “Time to Task” warrants further study.

Keywords:
simulation; nurse competency assessment; time based assessments
Repository Posting Date:
17-Aug-2017
Date of Publication:
17-Aug-2017
Conference Date:
2017
Conference Name:
INACSL Conference 2017
Conference Host:
INACSL
Conference Location:
Washington DC
Description:
INACSL Conference 2017: Nursing Simulation, Marriott Wardman Hotel, Washington DC

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.type.categoryFull-texten
dc.formatText-based Documenten
dc.typePresentationen
dc.evidence.levelN/Aen
dc.research.approachN/Aen
dc.titleValidation of “Time to Task” Performance Assessment Method in Simulationen_US
dc.contributor.authorShinnick, Mary Annen
dc.contributor.authorWoo, Mary A.en
dc.contributor.departmentNon-memberen
dc.author.detailsMary Ann Shinnick, PhD, ACNP, CCNS, CHSE; Mary A. Woo, PhDen
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/622522-
dc.description.abstract<p>Background. Current methods to assess clinical performance are known to be often invalid and unreliable1. Therefore, we pilot tested an objective assessment of clinical competence, &ldquo;Time to Task&rdquo; (ability to perform specific activities within 5 minutes) and compared it to two other assessments, the Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric (Lasater) and the common &ldquo;pass/fail&rdquo; assessment (subjective measure of whether the subject would &ldquo;pass&rdquo; or &ldquo;fail&rdquo;).</p> <p>Methods. Using a prospective, &ldquo;Known Groups&rdquo; (expert vs. novice nurses) design, Expert nurses (ICU nurses) and Novice nurses (senior prelicensure nursing students) participated individually in a simulation. Academic and clinical experts reviewed each video and scored each performance on two assessments while the third assessment, &ldquo;Time to Task&rdquo;, (key task elements to be completed in 5 minutes) was calculated from each video by the researcher. Statistical analysis consisted of T-Tests and Chi-square.</p> <p>Results. Fourteen evaluators reviewed the videos. For &ldquo;Time to Task&rdquo;. There was strong statistical significance between the novice and expert groups (p &lt; 0.01) and sensitivity (0.80) and specificity (0.85) were good. The Lasater (p &lt; 0.01) only had sensitivity (0.72) and specificity (0.40) while &ldquo;pass/fail&rdquo;, sensitivity was high (0.90) but specificity was low (0.47) indicating an ability to identify &ldquo;Expert&rdquo; nurses but not &ldquo;Novice&rdquo; nurses.</p> <p>Conclusion. &ldquo;Time to Task&rdquo; performed best as a measure of competency in simulation. While there have been similar objective measures in healthcare, they have not been adopted for assessment of clinical performance 2,3. One instrument is not appropriate for all assessment but &ldquo;Time to Task&rdquo; warrants further study.</p>en
dc.subjectsimulationen
dc.subjectnurse competency assessmenten
dc.subjecttime based assessmentsen
dc.date.available2017-08-17T20:25:24Z-
dc.date.issued2017-08-17-
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-17T20:25:24Z-
dc.conference.date2017en
dc.conference.nameINACSL Conference 2017en
dc.conference.hostINACSLen
dc.conference.locationWashington DCen
dc.descriptionINACSL Conference 2017: Nursing Simulation, Marriott Wardman Hotel, Washington DCen
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.