Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Development and validation of a theoretical test in non-anaesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. eHealth: Disease activity measures are related to the faecal gut microbiota in adult patients with ulcerative colitis

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Colonoscopy adverse events: are we getting the full picture?

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Pathophysiological-based treatments of complications of cirrhosis

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Anesthesiologists’ airway management expertise: Identifying subjective and objective knowledge gaps

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Reply to Firkins and Krishna

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKommentar/debatForskningpeer review

  3. Melatonin for preoperative and postoperative anxiety in adults

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

OBJECTIVE: Safety with non-anaesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation (NAAP) during gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is related to theoretical knowledge. A summative testing of knowledge before attempting supervised nurse-administered propofol sedation (NAPS) in the clinic is advised. The aims of this study were to develop a theoretical test about propofol sedation, to gather validity evidence for the test and to measure the effect of a NAPS-specific training course.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A three-phased psychometric study on multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ) test development, gathering of validity evidence and evaluation of the effect of a specific NAAP course on the test result. A MCQ containing 86 questions was developed and administered 113 times to 91 participants representing novices, intermediates and experienced.

RESULTS: Question difficulty analyses revealed 50 level I and II questions. The 50 MCQs showed mean (SD) intergroup differences (p = 0.001) between novices = 28.6 (4.82), intermediates = 36.8 (5.43) and experienced = 41.8 (4.65) and provided a pass score of 35.2. The course with pre-course test had significant effect on the knowledge of nurses (18% increase) and physicians (19% increase; p = 0.001 and 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: Data supported the validity of the developed MCQ test. The NAPS-specific course with pre-course testing adds theoretical knowledge to already well-prepared participants.

TidsskriftScandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology
Udgave nummer7
Sider (fra-til)872-9
Antal sider8
StatusUdgivet - jul. 2016

ID: 46478624