Acceptance and validity of the methods used to implement a competency based medical education programme in an Intensive Care Department of a teaching referral center

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the satisfaction of tutors and residents with a specific methodology used to implement CoBaTrICE. 2. To determine the reliability and validity of the global rating scales designed ad hoc to assess the performance of the residents for training purposes.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

All the residents and tutors of the ICU Department of the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico la Fe de Valencia.

INTERVENTION

CoBaTrICE implementation started in March 2016, it was based on: (1) Training the tutors in feedback techniques; (2) Performing multiple objective and structured work based assessments to achieve the competences of the program; and (3) The use of an electronic portfolio to promote learning reflection and to collect the evidence that learning was taking place.

METHODS

The acceptance of CoBaTrICE was explored through a satisfaction survey conducted after 9 months of implementation of the training program. The 15 residents and 5 tutors of the ICU Department were asked about the methodology of the formative assessments, the quality of the feedback, self-learning regulation and the electronic portfolio usefulness. The validity of the global rating scales was assessed through the tests alfa de Cronbach, reliability and generalizability indexes, and intraclass correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The implementation of CoBaTrICE was satisfactory in all the dimensions studied. The global rating scales used for formative purposes showed reliability and validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodology used to implement CoBaTrICE was highly valued by tutors and residents. The global rating scales used for formative purposes showed reliability and validity.

[Validation of EMINA and EVARUCI scales for assessing the risk of developing pressure ulcers in critical patients]

OBJECTIVE

To contribute to the validation of the EMINA and EVAUCI scales for assessing the risk of pressure ulcers in the critical patient and compare their predictive capacity in this same context.

METHOD

Prospective study from December 2012 until June 2013.

SETTING

Polyvalent intensive care unit of 14 beds in a reference hospital for two sanitary areas.

PATIENTS

patients of 18 years of age or older and without pressure ulcers were included. They were followed until development of a pressure ulcer of grade I or greater, medical discharge, death or 30 days.

MAIN VARIABLES

presence of ulcers, daily score of the risk of developing pressure ulcers through EMINA and EVARUCI evaluation. The validity of both scales was calculated using sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value. The level of significance was P≤0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients were evaluated. 67.2% were male with a mean age of 59.4 (DE: 16,8) years old, 53 (28%) developed pressure ulcers, being the incidence rate of 41 ulcers per 1000 admission days. The mean day of diagnosis was 7.7 days (DE: 4,4) and the most frequent area was the sacrum. The sensitivity and specificity for the mean of observations was 94.34 (IC95% 87.17-100) and 33.33 (IC95% 25.01-41.66) for the EMINA scale for a risk>10 and 92.45 (IC95% 84.40-100) and 42.96 (IC95% 34.24-51.68) for the EVARUCI scale for a risk of>11.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were found in predictive capacity of both scales. For sensitivities>90%the scales show to be insufficiently specific in the pressure ulcer risk detection in critical patients.