Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination

Objective: To validate a simulator for upper airway examination, fitted with sensors, for use as an academic tool for learning how to conduct examination of the upper airway and for evaluation of that learning. Study design: Validation study. Setting: Undergraduate medical education. Subjec...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves), Pacheco, S. (Sofía), Llorente-Ortega, M. (Marcos), Fernández-González, S. (Secundino)
Format: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Language:eng
Published: Wiley 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10171/68179
_version_ 1793400093543497728
author Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves)
Pacheco, S. (Sofía)
Llorente-Ortega, M. (Marcos)
Fernández-González, S. (Secundino)
author_facet Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves)
Pacheco, S. (Sofía)
Llorente-Ortega, M. (Marcos)
Fernández-González, S. (Secundino)
author_sort Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves)
collection DSpace
description Objective: To validate a simulator for upper airway examination, fitted with sensors, for use as an academic tool for learning how to conduct examination of the upper airway and for evaluation of that learning. Study design: Validation study. Setting: Undergraduate medical education. Subjects and methods: A group of 18 fifth-year medical students and another of 6 otorhinolaryngology specialists conducted 6 examinations each with the simulator. To investigate concurrent validity, we calculated the correlation between damage scores provided by the simulator and damage assessment by a specialist. To evaluate construct validity, we compared both groups with regard to damage scores, technical procedure, and time spent. To examine content and face validity, we used questionnaires based on a 5-point Likert scale. Results: For concurrent validity, the correlation between the simulator's damage scores and the specialist's damage assessment was high: Spearman's ρ was 0.828 (P < .001). For construct validity, the group of students differed from the group of specialists in damage scores (P = .027) and in technical procedures (P < .001) but not in time spent. For content validity, all questionnaire statements were scored highly, and both groups had similar average scores. For face validity, the group of specialists considered the simulator to be realistic, and all statements on the questionnaire were rated with at least 4/5. Conclusion: Concurrent, construct, content, and face validity have been demonstrated for a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination, which is therefore accurate enough to be used as an academic tool for learning and evaluation of learning.
format info:eu-repo/semantics/article
id oai:dadun.unav.edu:10171-68179
institution Universidad de Navarra
language eng
publishDate 2023
publisher Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling oai:dadun.unav.edu:10171-681792023-12-25T06:05:42Z Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves) Pacheco, S. (Sofía) Llorente-Ortega, M. (Marcos) Fernández-González, S. (Secundino) Concurrent validity Construct validity Content validity Face validity Flexible endoscope Simulation Upper airway examination Objective: To validate a simulator for upper airway examination, fitted with sensors, for use as an academic tool for learning how to conduct examination of the upper airway and for evaluation of that learning. Study design: Validation study. Setting: Undergraduate medical education. Subjects and methods: A group of 18 fifth-year medical students and another of 6 otorhinolaryngology specialists conducted 6 examinations each with the simulator. To investigate concurrent validity, we calculated the correlation between damage scores provided by the simulator and damage assessment by a specialist. To evaluate construct validity, we compared both groups with regard to damage scores, technical procedure, and time spent. To examine content and face validity, we used questionnaires based on a 5-point Likert scale. Results: For concurrent validity, the correlation between the simulator's damage scores and the specialist's damage assessment was high: Spearman's ρ was 0.828 (P < .001). For construct validity, the group of students differed from the group of specialists in damage scores (P = .027) and in technical procedures (P < .001) but not in time spent. For content validity, all questionnaire statements were scored highly, and both groups had similar average scores. For face validity, the group of specialists considered the simulator to be realistic, and all statements on the questionnaire were rated with at least 4/5. Conclusion: Concurrent, construct, content, and face validity have been demonstrated for a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination, which is therefore accurate enough to be used as an academic tool for learning and evaluation of learning. 2023-12-22T13:45:57Z 2023-12-22T13:45:57Z 2020 info:eu-repo/semantics/article https://hdl.handle.net/10171/68179 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess application/pdf Wiley
spellingShingle Concurrent validity
Construct validity
Content validity
Face validity
Flexible endoscope
Simulation
Upper airway examination
Diez-Goñi, N. (Nieves)
Pacheco, S. (Sofía)
Llorente-Ortega, M. (Marcos)
Fernández-González, S. (Secundino)
Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title_full Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title_fullStr Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title_full_unstemmed Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title_short Validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
title_sort validation of a sensor-fitted simulator for upper airway examination
topic Concurrent validity
Construct validity
Content validity
Face validity
Flexible endoscope
Simulation
Upper airway examination
url https://hdl.handle.net/10171/68179
work_keys_str_mv AT diezgoninnieves validationofasensorfittedsimulatorforupperairwayexamination
AT pachecossofia validationofasensorfittedsimulatorforupperairwayexamination
AT llorenteortegammarcos validationofasensorfittedsimulatorforupperairwayexamination
AT fernandezgonzalezssecundino validationofasensorfittedsimulatorforupperairwayexamination