Search

Background: Lumbar puncture is often associated with uncertainty and limited experience on the part of residents; therefore, preparatory interventions can be essential. There is growing interest in the potential benefit of videos over written text. However, little attention has been given to whether the design of the videos impacts on subsequent performance., Objective: To investigate the effect of different preparatory interventions on learner performance and self-confidence regarding lumbar puncture (LP)., Design: Randomized controlled trial in which participants were randomly assigned to one of three interventions as preparation for performing lumbar puncture: 1) goal- and learner-centered video (GLV) presenting procedure-specific process goals and learner-centered information; 2) traditional video (TV) providing expert-driven content, but no process goals; and 3) written text (WT) with illustrations., Participants and Main Measures: Participants were PGY-1 doctors without LP experience. After the preparatory intervention, participants performed an LP in a simulated setting with a standardized patient and an assistant. Two content experts, blinded to participant group allocation, assessed video recordings of the performance using the Lumbar Puncture Assessment Tool (LumPAT) and an overall global rating. Participants rated their self-confidence immediately prior to performing the procedure. The primary outcome was the difference in LumPAT scores among groups., Key Results: A total of 110 PGY-1 doctors were included. Results demonstrated significant differences in LumPAT mean scores among the three groups: GLV, 42.8; TV, 40.6; WT, 38.1 (p = 0.01). The global rating scores were highest in the GLV group (p = 0.026). Self-confidence scores differed significantly among the three groups (p = 0.003), with the TV group scoring the highest. There were no significant correlations between self-confidence scores and performance scores in any of the groups., Conclusion: A video designed with procedure-specific process goals and learner-centered information resulted in better subsequent LP performance than a traditionally designed video or written text. Participants' self-confidence was not predictive of their actual performance.

Background: Lumbar puncture is a common procedure in many specialties. The procedure serves to diagnose life-threatening conditions, often requiring rapid performance. However, junior doctors possess uncertainties regarding performing the procedure and frequently perform below expectations. Hence, proper training and assessment of performance is crucial before entering clinical practice., Objective: To develop and collect validity evidence for an assessment tool for lumbar puncture performance, including a standard to determine when trainees are ready for clinical practice., Design: Development of a new tool, based on clinician interviews and a literature review, was followed by an explorative study to gather validity evidence., Participants and Main Measures: We interviewed 12 clinicians from different specialties. The assessment tool was used to assess 11 doctors at the advanced beginners' level and 18 novices performing the procedure in a simulated, ward-like setting with a standardized patient. Procedural performance was assessed by three content experts. We used generalizability theory to explore reliability. The discriminative ability of the tool was explored by comparing performance scores between the two groups. The contrasting groups method was used to set a pass/fail standard and the consequences of this was explored., Key Results: The interviews identified that in addition to the technical aspects of the procedure, non-technical elements involving planning and conducting the procedure are important. Cronbach's alpha = 0.92, Generalizability-coefficient was 0.88 and a Decision-study found one rater was sufficient for low-stakes assessments (G-coefficient 0.71). The discriminative ability was confirmed by a significant difference between the mean scores of novices, 40.9 (SD 6.1) and of advanced beginners, 47.8 (SD 4.0), p = 0.004. A standard of 44.0 was established which was consistent with the raters' global judgments of pass/fail., Conclusion: We developed and demonstrated strong validity evidence for the lumbar puncture assessment tool. The tool can be used to assess readiness for practice.