Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills Tool in Audiology

Document Type : Original article

Authors

1 Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Community Medicine, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Research Center, Social Injury Prevention Research Institute, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

3 Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Background and Aims: Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) is a method for objective assessment of clinical skills by providing feedback. The present study aims to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Persian version of DOPS for the assessment of clinical skills in audiology students.
Methods: In this descriptive analytical study with a cross-sectional design, participants were the students of audiology internship in the School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. According to the panel of experts, three basic skills were selected as assessment items from among the main skills of audiology. After declaring consent, the students were assessed by a trained examiner while performing clinical skills in real clinical environment, and the results were recorded in a structured checklist. Then, students received feedback in an appropriate environment. Face, content, and construct validity and reliability of the Persian DOPS were then evaluated.
Results: The content validity index of the Persian DOPS was more than 0.79, and its Content validity ratio was more than 0.42. Spearman correlation coefficient for the relationship of pure tone assessment, tinnitus assessment, and auditory brainstem response assessment with the total DOPS score were 0.785, 0.704, and 0.742, respectively indicating its acceptable construct validity (p < 0.001). Cronbach’s alpha value for the reliability of the Persian DOPS was reported 0.788. Minimum and maximum values ​​of the correlation coefficient for the inter-rater reliability were 0.504 and 0.837, respectively which were significant in all tests. Students’ and raters’ satisfaction with the Persian DOPS was 88% and 100%, respectively ranged from satisfied to very satisfied.
Conclusion: The Persian DOPS is a valid and reliable tool for the objective assessment of procedural skills in audiology.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Chehrzad M, Shafiei PZ, Mirzaei M, Kazemnejad E. Comparison between two methods: Objective Structured Clinical Evaluation (OSCE) and traditional on nursing students satisfaction. Journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences. 2004; 13(50):8-13. https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=34882
  2. Saif AA. [Measurement, assessment and evaluation of education (Persian)]. Tehran: Doran; 2015. https://www.google.com/books/edition/%D8%B2/SO0ojwEACAAJ?hl=en
  3. Kazemi A, Ehsanpour S, Hassanzadeh A. [Investigating the academic achievement evaluation of specialized theoretical courses of midwifery BS (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2010; 9(4):346-55. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=107849
  4. Mitchell C, Bhat S, Herbert A, Baker P. Workplace-based assessments of junior doctors: Do scores predict training difficulties? Medical Education. 2011; 45(12):1190-8. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04056.x] [PMID]
  5. Wilkinson JR, Crossley JG, Wragg A, Mills P, Cowan G, Wade W. Implementing workplace-based assessment across the medical specialties in the United Kingdom. Medical Education. 2008; 42(4):364-73. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03010.x] [PMID]
  6. Bindal N, Goodyear H, Bindal T, Wall D. DOPS assessment: A study to evaluate the experience and opinions of trainees and assessors. Medical Teacher. 2013; 35(6):1230-4. [DOI:10.3109/0142159X.2012.746447] [PMID]
  7. Wilkinson J, Benjamin A, Wade W. Assessing the performance of doctors in training. BMJ. 2003; 327(7416):s91-2. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.327.7416.s91] [PMID]
  8. Sahebalzamani M, Farahani H, Jahantigh M. [Validity and reliability of direct observation of procedural skills in evaluating the clinical skills of nursing students of Zahedan nursing and midwifery school (Persian)]. Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2012; 14(2):76-81. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=152783
  9. Kouhpayezadeh J, Hemmati A, Baradaran HR, Mirhosseini F, Akbari H, Sarvieh M. Validity and reliability of direct observation of procedural skills in evaluating clinical skills of midwifery students of kashan nursing and midwifery school (Persian)]. Journal of Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences. 2014; 21(1):145-54. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=216087
  10. Bould MD, Crabtree NA, Naik VN. Assessment of procedural skills in anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2009; 103(4):472-83. [DOI:10.1093/bja/aep241] [PMID]
  11. Barton JR, Corbett S, van der Vleuten CP, Programme EBCS. The validity and reliability of a direct observation of procedural skills assessment tool: Assessing colonoscopic skills of senior endoscopists. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2012; 75(3):591-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.053] [PMID]
  12. Weller J, Jolly B, Misur M, Merry A, Jones A, Crossley JM, et al. Mini-clinical evaluation exercise in anaesthesia training. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2009; 102(5):633-41. [DOI:10.1093/bja/aep055] [PMID]

 

The Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Volume 10, Issue 2
Summer
May and June 2021
Pages 346-357

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 07 April 2020
  • Revise Date: 01 July 2020
  • Accept Date: 15 July 2020
  • First Publish Date: 22 May 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics