Dataset Information

SBAR-LA: SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Structured communication tools are associated with improvement in information transfer and lead to improved patient safety. Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation (SBAR) is one such tool. Because there is a paucity of instruments to measure SBAR effectiveness, we developed and validated an assessment tool for use with prepractice health professions students.

Methods

We developed the SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment (SBAR-LA) by starting with a preliminary list of items based on the SBAR framework. During an interprofessional team training event, students were trained in the use of SBAR. Subsequently, they were assigned to perform a simulated communication scenario demonstrating use of SBAR principles. We used 10 videos from these scenarios to refine the items and scales over two rounds. Finally, we applied the instrument on another subset of 10 students to conduct rater calibration and measure interrater reliability.

Results

We used a total of 20 out of 225 videos of student performance to create the 10-item instrument. Interrater reliability was .672, and for eight items, the Fleiss' kappa was considered good or fair.

Discussion

We developed a scoring rubric for teaching SBAR communication that met criteria for validity and demonstrated adequate interrater reliability. Our development process provided evidence of validity for the content, construct, and response process used. Additional evidence from the use of SBAR-LA in settings where communication skills can be directly observed, such as simulation and clinical environments, may further enhance the instrument's accuracy. The SBAR-LA is a valid and reliable instrument to assess student performance.

SUBMITTER: Davis BP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8520891 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

SBAR-LA: SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment.

Davis Beth P BP Mitchell Sally A SA Weston Jeannie J Dragon Catherine C Luthra Munish M Kim James J Stoddard Hugh A HA Ander Douglas S DS

MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources 20211018

<h4>Introduction</h4>Structured communication tools are associated with improvement in information transfer and lead to improved patient safety. Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation (SBAR) is one such tool. Because there is a paucity of instruments to measure SBAR effectiveness, we developed and validated an assessment tool for use with prepractice health professions students.<h4>Methods</h4>We developed the SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment (SBAR-LA) by starting w ...[more]

PMID: 34746375

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSurgical coaching continues to gain momentum as an innovative method for continuous professional development. A tool to measure the performance of a surgical coach is needed to provide formative feedback to coaches for continued skill development and to assess the fidelity of a coaching intervention for future research and dissemination.ObjectiveTo evaluate the validity of the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Rubric (WiSCoR), a novel tool to assess the performance of a peer surgical coach.Design, setting, and participantsSurgical coaching sessions from November 2014 through February 2018 conducted by 2 statewide peer surgical coaching programs were audio recorded and transcribed. Twelve raters used WiSCoR to rate the performance of the surgical coach for each session. The study included peer surgical coaches in the Wisconsin Surgical Coaching Program (n = 8) and the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative coaching program (n = 15). The data were analyzed in 2019.Interventions or exposuresUse of WiSCoR to rate peer surgical coaching sessions.Main outcomes and measuresThere were 282 WiSCoR ratings from the 106 coaching sessions included in the study. WiSCoR was evaluated using a framework, including inter-rater reliability assessed with Gwet weighted agreement coefficent. Descriptive statistics of WiSCoR were calculated.ResultsEight coaches (35%) and 11 coachees (29%) were from the Wisconsin Surgical Program and 15 coaches (65%) and 27 coachees (71%) were from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative. The validity of WiSCoR is supported by high interrater reliability (Gwet weighted agreement coefficient, 0.87) as well as a weakly positive correlation of WiSCoR to coachee ratings of coaches (r = 0.22; P = .04), rigorous content development, consistent rater training, and the association of WiSCoR with coach and coaching program development. The mean (SD) overall coach performance rating using WiSCoR was 3.23 (0.82; range, 1-5).Conclusions and relevanceWiSCoR is a reliable measure that can assess the performance of a surgical coach, inform fidelity to coaching principles, and provide formative feedback to surgical coaches. While coachee ratings may reflect coachee satisfaction, they are not able to determine the quality of a coach.

Project description:ImportanceGender bias may affect assessment in competency-based medical education.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of gender with assessment of internal medicine residents.Design, setting, and participantsThis multisite, retrospective, cross-sectional study included 6 internal medicine residency programs in the United States. Data were collected from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, and analyzed from June 7 to November 6, 2019.ExposuresFaculty assessments of resident performance during general medicine inpatient rotations.Main outcomes and measuresStandardized scores were calculated based on rating distributions for the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's core competencies and internal medicine Milestones at each site. Standardized scores are expressed as SDs from the mean. The interaction of gender and postgraduate year (PGY) with standardized scores was assessed, adjusting for site, time of year, resident In-Training Examination percentile rank, and faculty rank and specialty.ResultsData included 3600 evaluations for 703 residents (387 male [55.0%]) by 605 faculty (318 male [52.6%]). Interaction between resident gender and PGY was significant in 6 core competencies. In PGY2, female residents scored significantly higher than male residents in 4 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.10 [0.04] vs 0.22 [0.05]; P = .04), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], -0.06 [0.05] vs 0.13 [0.05]; P = .003), professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], -0.04 [0.06] vs 0.21 [0.06]; P = .001), and interpersonal and communication skills (mean standardized score [SE], 0.06 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.06]; P < .001). In PGY3, male residents scored significantly higher than female patients in 5 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.05]; P = .03), medical knowledge (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.24 [0.06]; P = .003), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], 0.30 [0.05] vs 0.12 [0.06]; P = .02), practice-based learning (mean standardized score [SE], 0.39 [0.05] vs 0.16 [0.06]; P = .004), and professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], 0.35 [0.05] vs 0.18 [0.06]; P = .03). There was a significant increase in male residents' competency scores between PGY2 and PGY3 (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, 0.208-0.391; P ≤ .002) that was not seen in female residents' scores (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, -0.117 to 0.101; P ≥ .14). There was a significant increase in male residents' scores between PGY2 and PGY3 cohorts in 6 competencies with female faculty and in 4 competencies with male faculty. There was no significant change in female residents' competency scores between PGY2 to PGY3 cohorts with male or female faculty. Interaction between faculty-resident gender dyad and PGY was significant in the patient care competency (β estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY1 vs PGY3, 0.184 [0.158]; β estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY2 vs PGY3, 0.457 [0.181]; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, resident gender was associated with differences in faculty assessments of resident performance, and differences were linked to PGY. In contrast to male residents' scores, female residents' scores displayed a peak-and-plateau pattern whereby assessment scores peaked in PGY2. Notably, the peak-and-plateau pattern was seen in assessments by male and female faculty. Further study of factors that influence gender-based differences in assessment is needed.

Dataset Information

SBAR-LA: SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

SBAR-LA: SBAR Brief Assessment Rubric for Learner Assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets