Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Pediatr Crit Care Med ; 25(5): e239-e245, 2024 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38695703

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To adapt and develop a reliable and easily administered outcome measure of physical and respiratory function in critically ill children in the PICU. DESIGN: Modified Delphi study to adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment (CPAx) tool for use in children 2-18 years old, with subsequent prospective testing in a single-center cohort. SETTING: Single-center tertiary PICU. SUBJECTS: Delphi process in 27 panelists (including physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and pediatric intensivists from seven countries from January 2018 to March 2018). Cohort study in 54 patients admitted to PICU for greater than 24 hours over a 3-month period (April 2018 to June 2018), with median age 5.5 years (interquartile range [IQR], 3-12.75 yr), 33 of 54 male, and 38 of 54 invasively ventilated. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three Delphi iterations were required to reach greater than or equal to 80% consensus in all the children's CPAx (cCPAx) items. In the subsequent cohort study, six physiotherapists used the cCPAx tool and scored 54 participants, with a total 106 observations. The median cCPAx tool score was 14.50 (IQR, 3-25) out of a possible total of 50. Inter-rater reliability for 30 randomly selected participants was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.998). Completion rate of cCPAx in the 54 patients occurred in 78 of 106 occasions (74%). CONCLUSIONS: The cCPAx tool content that was developed using Delphi methodology provided a feasible and clinically relevant tool for use in assessing physical morbidity in PICU patients 2-18 years old. Overall, the cCPAx scores were low, demonstrating low levels of physical function and high levels of immobility during PICU care.


Subject(s)
Critical Care , Delphi Technique , Intensive Care Units, Pediatric , Humans , Child, Preschool , Male , Adolescent , Child , Female , Critical Care/methods , Prospective Studies , Critical Illness/therapy , Reproducibility of Results , Physical Examination/methods , Physical Functional Performance
2.
BMC Med Educ ; 23(1): 280, 2023 Apr 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37095475

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During workplace-based clinical placements, best practice assessment states students should expect consistency between assessors rating their performance. To assist clinical educators (CEs) to provide consistent assessment of physiotherapy student performance, nine paediatric vignettes depicting various standards of simulated student performance, as assessed by the Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice (APP), were developed. The APP defines adequate on the global rating scale (GRS) as the minimally acceptable standard for an entry-level physiotherapist. The project aimed to evaluate consistency of paediatric physiotherapy educators assessing simulated student performance using the APP GRS. METHODS: Three paediatric scenarios representing neurodevelopment across three age ranges, infant, toddler and adolescent, were developed and scripted that depicted a 'not adequate', 'adequate' and 'good-excellent' performance based on the APP GRS. An expert panel (n = 9) conducted face and content validation. Once agreement was reached for all scripts, each video was filmed. A purposive sample of physiotherapists providing paediatric clinical education in Australia were invited to participate in the study. Thirty-five CEs, with minimum 3-years clinical experience and had supervised a student within the past year, were sent three videos at four-week intervals. Videos depicted the same clinical scenario, however performance varied with each video. Participants rated the performance on the four categories: 'not adequate', 'adequate', 'good' and 'excellent' Consistency among raters was assessed using percentage agreement to establish reliability. RESULTS: The vignettes were assessed a combined total of 59 times. Across scenarios, percentage agreement at the not adequate level was 100%. In contrast, the adequate scenarios for the Infant, Toddler and Adolescent video failed to meet the 75% agreement level. However, when combining adequate or good-excellent, percentage agreement was > 86%. The study demonstrated strong consensus when comparing not adequate to adequate or better performance. Importantly, no performance scripted as not adequate was passed by any assessor. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced educators demonstrate consistency in identifying not adequate from adequate or good-excellent performance when assessing a simulated student performance using the APP. Recommendation for practice: These validated video vignettes will be a valuable training tool to improve educator consistency when assessing student performance in paediatric physiotherapy.


Subject(s)
Clinical Competence , Students , Humans , Child , Adolescent , Reproducibility of Results , Educational Measurement , Physical Therapy Modalities/education
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...