Team members, particularly novices, tend to simplify and distort others' roles and motivations as they interpret tense communication. We suggest that such simplifications may be rhetorical, reflecting professional rivalries on the OR team. In addition, we theorise that novices' echoing of role simplification has implications for their professional identity formation.

P Pu ur rp po os se e: : Cumulative sum (cusum) analysis is a statistical and graphical tool that examines trends for sequential events over time. It has been used to determine proficiency in technical procedures. We used cusum to determine the number of labour epidural attempts necessary for proficiency in our training program.

Team communications in the OR follow observable patterns and are influenced by recurrent themes that suggest sites of team tension. Tension in team communication affects novices, who respond with behaviors that may intensify rather than resolve interprofessional conflict.

Background and Objectives: Demand is growing for objective assessment of manual skills and competencies of invasive procedures. The aim of this study was to validate an objective tool for assessing residents' skill in performing epidural anesthesia by use of a global assessment scale and a 3-scale, 27-stage checklist. We wish to demonstrate that this tool can differentiate operators with different levels of training.Methods: Second-year anesthesia residents were recruited. Their previous experience was assessed by questionnaire. They were repeatedly videotaped performing epidural anesthesia over a 6-month period. Videotaping was done in a blinded manner that masked the identity and level of training of the residents. Three blinded, independent examiners evaluated each session by use of a specifically devised assessment tool that consisted of a global rating scale and a 3-scale, 27-stage checklist to judge the skill level and grade the videotaped sessions.Results: Twenty-one sessions by 6 residents were videotaped over 6 months. Interrater reliability for the different checklist and global-rating form items shows moderate to high degree of agreement for most stages. Total scores demonstrate almost perfect agreement (/ICC Ϯ SE ϭ 0.90 Ϯ 0.03 and 0.83 Ϯ 0.13, respectively; P Ͻ .0001) between examiners. To test whether higher total scores are associated with greater experience, a series of repeated-measures ANCOVAs were performed. In both the global-rating form and the checklist, a significant relation between total scores and epidurals done was found to exist (checklist: P Ͻ .0001; global rating: P Ͻ .0001). Conclusions:The results of our study show that scores on a system that consists of a global-rating form and a task-specific checklist had a significant relation to the number of epidural insertions performed (i.e., experience). The interrater reliability of these assessment tools was very strong. Evaluation of technical skills by an objective tool under direct observation, as opposed to laboratory setting, may create a more reliable standard of assessment. Furthermore, residency programs could use these evaluations to identify deficiencies in teaching programs and trainees who require extra instruction. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2006;31:304-310.