Validity of an Exam Assessment in Surgical Skill: EBSQ-VASC Pilot Study

Pandey, Vikas; Wolfe, John H.; Lindahl, Anne Karin; Rauwerda, J. A.; Bergqvist, David

doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2003.12.026

Cited by 40 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study concluded that live marking by independent examiners offered higher reliability and validity than videotape assessment. The results of live marking showed a significant correlation with the results of dexterity assessment, whereas videotape assessment showed no such correlation 11 . On the basis of these results, videotape assessment was abandoned after the first year.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Each candidate was expected to perform a saphenofemoral junction ligation as they would in the operating theatre. Second, anastomotic technique was assessed using a leg model (Stiftung Vascular International, Pontresina, Switzerland) simulating anastomosis to an anterior tibial artery 11 . Third, surgical dexterity was assessed using the task of surgical knot-tying.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two examiners assessed each candidate and were asked to mark them independently. Although evidence from surgical licensing authorities is lacking, it has been suggested that, in a professional examination such as this, interobserver reliability should be greater than 0·8 11,21,22 .…”

Section: Competence Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Generic surgical skill was assessed using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) global rating scale 23 -25 . Procedure-specific operative components were assessed using the Imperial College Evaluation of Procedural Skill (ICEPS) 11,13,24 . Both rating scales used a five-point Likert scale with descriptive comments at positions 1 (poor), 3 (competent) and 5 (excellent).…”

Section: Competence Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The examination assessment of technical competence in vascular surgery

Pandey

Wolfe

Liapis

et al. 2006

British Journal of Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Competence Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Competence Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The examination assessment of technical competence in vascular surgery

Pandey

Wolfe

Liapis

et al. 2006

British Journal of Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6][7][8] Pre-requisites to the examination included the possession of a Certificate of Completion of Specialist Training (CCST) issued by one of the member states of the European Union and personal experience of index procedures in vascular surgery evaluated using logbook accreditation. 8 A technical skills component to this examination was validated in a 2-year pilot study 9,10 and formally introduced in 2004 as an integral part of the fellowship examination. 2.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Assessment of Technical Skill in Surgery: The Need for Expert Feedback

Pandey¹,

Wolfe²,

Black³

et al. 2008

annals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2008; 90: 286-290 286The ability to assess one's own performance critically in surgery is a valuable trait for surgeons throughout training and independent practice. Unfortunately, this remains an underdeveloped skill in surgical training and receives little attention from surgical educators. For trainees, it allows identification of their strengths and, more importantly, weaknesses in their ability, to build upon previous performance and take the necessary remedial action. For surgeons in independent practice, the introduction of new surgical techniques necessitates focused self-assessment.Evidence for self-assessment in surgery is poor, compared self, peer and supervisor ratings with scores on the American Board of Surgery InTraining Examination (ABSITE). The results showed significant correlation between ratings by peers and supervisors (r = 0.92; P < 0.001). The average of peer and supervisor ratings showed a moderate correlation with ABSITE scores (r = 0.58; P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis suggested that supervisors were influenced mainly by the interpersonal skill of the resident and secondarily by their ability. Self-assessment was influenced mainly by the residents' perceptions of their own ability, followed by interpersonal skills and effort.

show abstract