Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023
Development and initial validation of a video-based peroral endoscopic myotomy assessment tool.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Dennis, Draganov Peter V, Pohl Heiko, Aihara Hiroyuki, Jeyalingam Thurarshen, Khashab Mouen, Liu Nanlong, Hasan Muhammad K, Jawaid Salmaan, Othman Mohamed, Al-Haddad Mohamed, DeWitt John M, Triggs Joseph R, Wang Andrew Y, Bechara Robert, Sethi Amrita, Law Ryan, Aadam Aziz A, Kumta Nikhil, Sharma Neil, Hayat Maham, Zhang YiYang, Yi Fanchao, Elmunzer B Joseph
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Video analysis has emerged as a potential strategy for performance assessment and improvement. We aimed to develop a video-based skill assessment tool for peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).
METHODS: POEM was deconstructed into basic procedural components through video analysis by an expert panel. A modified Delphi approach and 2 validation exercises were conducted to refine the POEM assessment tool (POEMAT). Twelve assessors used the final POEMAT version to grade 10 videos. Fully crossed generalizability (G) studies investigated the contributions of assessors, endoscopists' performance, and technical elements to reliability. G coefficients below .5 were considered unreliable, between .5 and .7 as modestly reliable, and above .7 as indicative of satisfactory reliability.
RESULTS: After task deconstruction, discussions, and the modified Delphi process, the final POEMAT comprised 9 technical elements. G analysis showed low variance for endoscopist performance (.8%-24.9%) and high interrater variability (range, 63.2%-90.1%). The G score was moderately reliable (≥.60) for "submucosal tunneling" and "myotomy" and satisfactorily reliable (≥.70) for "active hemostasis" and "mucosal closure."
CONCLUSIONS: We developed and established initial content and response process validity evidence for the POEMAT. Future steps include appraisal of the tool using a wider range of POEM videos to establish and improve the discriminative validity of this tool.
METHODS: POEM was deconstructed into basic procedural components through video analysis by an expert panel. A modified Delphi approach and 2 validation exercises were conducted to refine the POEM assessment tool (POEMAT). Twelve assessors used the final POEMAT version to grade 10 videos. Fully crossed generalizability (G) studies investigated the contributions of assessors, endoscopists' performance, and technical elements to reliability. G coefficients below .5 were considered unreliable, between .5 and .7 as modestly reliable, and above .7 as indicative of satisfactory reliability.
RESULTS: After task deconstruction, discussions, and the modified Delphi process, the final POEMAT comprised 9 technical elements. G analysis showed low variance for endoscopist performance (.8%-24.9%) and high interrater variability (range, 63.2%-90.1%). The G score was moderately reliable (≥.60) for "submucosal tunneling" and "myotomy" and satisfactorily reliable (≥.70) for "active hemostasis" and "mucosal closure."
CONCLUSIONS: We developed and established initial content and response process validity evidence for the POEMAT. Future steps include appraisal of the tool using a wider range of POEM videos to establish and improve the discriminative validity of this tool.