Biomedical subjects

Jonathan Beard

Publications and source records attributed to Jonathan Beard.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Developing an education and assessment framework for the Foundation Programme.

AIM: To develop an education and assessment framework for the second year of the Foundation Programme (F2). METHODS: A total of 23 PRHOs were recruited to the F2 pilot in August 2003. The training posts included a variety of specialties at 2 hospital trusts plus primary care. Trainee expectations and satisfaction were evaluated using questionnaires administered before and at the end of the pilot. At the end of the pilot, 10 trainees participated in a focus group and 19 trainers participated in a semistructured telephone interview. RESULTS: The majority of trainees (78%) felt that their expectations of the F2 pilot were met and all felt that they had improved their generic skills. Attendance at the generic education programme was 95%. The majority of trainees found the assessment framework useful. The percentage of undecided trainees in terms of career aspirations dropped from 48% to 13%. Trainees valued the breadth of experience provide by the year and the support provided by the programme directors and each other. A need for better communication, administrative support and time for assessment was highlighted by the trainers. CONCLUSIONS: Early, focused education on generic skills will benefit both doctors and their patients. More varied career experience will help to ensure that doctors make appropriate and timely career decisions. Pilots are identifying good practice and areas that need improvement.

Attitude↗

PubMed2004

Comparison of bench test evaluations of surgical skill with live operating performance assessments.

BACKGROUND: Attempts at assessing surgical proficiency have generally used laboratory simulation to evaluate skill. The aim of this study was to compare technical ability as measured on a bench simulation with actual operative performance. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-two general surgeons and trainees were recruited: consultants (n = 4), specialist registrars (n = 14), and senior house officers (n = 4). They were assessed while performing a saphenofemoral dissection on an anesthetized patient in the operating theater, and performing the same procedure on an inanimate model within the laboratory. The Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill method, consisting of a 7-parameter global rating (maximum score 35) and 17-point step-by-step checklist (maximum score 17) was used to measure performance in both environments. Face, content, and construct validity of the synthetic model were established as part of this study. RESULTS: There was a significant relationship between technical skill as measured on the bench test model and performance within the operating theater with respect to both global rating (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.824, p < 0.001; alpha coefficient 0.89) and checklist ratings (r = 0.514, p < 0.02; alpha coefficient 0.68) rating assessments. Global rating scores correlated with experience for both operative (r = 0.822, p < 0.001) and bench (r = 0.515, p < 0.05) settings. There was no difference in level of measured performance between operating theater and bench model (global rating mean 23.25 +/- 6.66 versus 23.75 +/- 5.62, respectively; paired t-test p = 0.559). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of technical skill using inanimate procedural simulation translates to actual surgical performance within the operating theater. This further validates use of bench test evaluations to measure surgical technical ability.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Porcine transfer study: virtual reality simulator training compared with porcine training in endovascular novices.

PURPOSE: To compare the learning of endovascular interventional skills by training on pig models versus virtual reality simulators. METHODS: Twelve endovascular novices participated in a study consisting of a pig laboratory (P-Lab) and a virtual reality laboratory (VR-Lab). Subjects were stratified by experience and randomized into four training groups. Following 1 hr of didactic instruction, all attempted an iliac artery stenosis (IAS) revascularization in both laboratories. Onsite proctors evaluated performances using task-specific checklists and global rating scales, yielding a Total Score. Participants completed two training sessions of 3 hr each, using their group's assigned method (P-Lab x 2, P-Lab + VR-Lab, VR-Lab + P-Lab, or VR-Lab x 2) and were re-evaluated in both laboratories. A panel of two highly experienced interventional radiologists performed assessments from video recordings. ANCOVA analysis of Total Score against years of surgical, interventional radiology (IR) experience and cumulative number of P-Lab or VR-Lab sessions was conducted. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was determined by comparing proctored scores with the video assessors in only the VR-Lab. RESULTS: VR-Lab sessions improved the VR-Lab Total Score (beta = 3.029, p = 0.0015) and P-Lab Total Score (beta = 1.814, p = 0.0452). P-Lab sessions increased the P-Lab Total Score (beta = 4.074, p < 0.0001) but had no effect on the VR-Lab Total Score. In the general statistical model, both P-Lab sessions (beta = 2.552, p = 0.0010) and VR-Lab sessions (beta = 2.435, p = 0.0032) significantly improved Total Score. Neither previous surgical experience nor IR experience predicted Total Score. VR-Lab scores were consistently higher than the P-Lab scores (Delta = 6.659, p < 0.0001). VR-Lab IRR was substantial (r = 0.649, p < 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular skills learned in the virtual environment may be transferable to the real catheterization laboratory as modeled in the P-Lab.

Adult↗