• 作者：Bartomeu Casabella Abril^a ; ^{bcasabellaa@meditex.es} ; David Lacasta Tintorer^a ; Thais Clusa Gironella^a ; Aina Perelló ; Bratescu^a ; Ma Dolores Garcí ; a Ortega^a ; Antoni Albiach Pla^b ; Salomé ; Larrea Tá ; rrega^c
• 关键词：Soporte vital bá ; sico ; Atenció ; n primaria ; Fiabilidad ; Validez
• 刊名：Atenci贸n Primaria
• 出版年：2010
• 期刊代码：pca69_02126567
• 类别：med
• 出版时间：January 2010
• 卷：42
• 期：1
• 页码：7-13
• 文件大小：508 K

Objective

To prepare and validate a tool to measure Basic Life Support (BLS) and semi-automatic defibrillator (SAD) skills adapted for use by health professionals in Primary Care Teams (PCT). To propose an updated version and demonstrate self-sufficiency of the team to use it in a training evaluation.

Design

Validation of measurement tools. Study of reliability with repeated measurements after a training course.

Setting

Drassanes Primary Care Centre. Raval Sud Basic Health Area. Barcelona. Spain.

Participants

A total of 37 voluntary resuscitators (all doctors/nurses), professional camera, medical controller, computerised mannequin, 6 evaluators.

Interventions

Test preparation methodology. Cardiff Model 3.1. Implementation: 2 filmed series (professional+domestic), of 26-25 鈥渟tation type鈥?simulations, separated by 1 month. A training workshop between series. Retrospective evaluation of DVD recordings (5 evaluators). 2nd series scored again at 3 weeks with a blind and random order filmed version.

Main measurements

Variables: performances classified from worse to best execution. Psychometric analysis: Validity (content/apparent). Test-retest reliability, between-observer and sensitivity to change.

Results

Compared to the Cardiff test (46 items) our 83 item test contained 38(46%) new, 34(41%) modified and 11(13%) similar. Between-evaluator reliability, excellent/good in 51/62 items analysed; Within-evaluator and between-filming reliability, excellent/good in all except 1 item; the test score doubled after the training course. A version of the test according to BLS-SAD recommendations is proposed.

Conclusions

On there not being useful tools available for Primary Care doctors and nurses, one has been prepared with adequate psychometric guarantees and proven self-sufficient evaluation. We propose the immediate application of the updated version for training evaluation purposes.