Is the rating result reliable? A new approach to respond to a medical trainee's concerns about the reliability of Mini-CEX assessment.

PURPOSE: Whether the rating result of mini-clinical evaluation exercise (Mini-CEX) for rating clinical skills is reliable is of a medical trainee's great concerns. The objectives of this study were to analyze the test-retest reliability, interrater reliability and internal consistency reliability of Mini-CEX. METHODS: Three clinical scenarios, each played by a standardized patient and resident, were developed and videotaped. A group of assessors were recruited to rate the resident's clinical skills using Mini-CEX with a nine-point grading scale in each videotaped clinical scenario. Each assessor was required: (1) to watch the videotaped clinical scenarios a sequential order; (2) to rate each medical trainee's clinical skills in each clinical scenario for two rating sessions, and there must be a minimum three-week interval between the first and the second Mini-CEX rating session. RESULTS: A total of 38 assessors participated in this study. This study showed that: (1) an assessor carried out similar rating reuslts under the same clinical performance based on an acceptable test-retest reliability (Pearson's correlation coefficients = 0.24-0.76, P value=<0.01-0.14); (2) assessors gave similar rating results to a medical trainee's clinical performance based on a good interrater reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.57-0.83, P value=<0.01-0.03); and (3) the items reflected unidimensionally a construct-a medical trainee's clinical skills based on an excellent internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.92-0.97). CONCLUSION: This study convincingly showed that Mini-CEX is a reliable assessment tool for rating clinical skills, and can be widely used to assess medical trainees' clinical skills.

Are physicians on the same page about do-not-resuscitate? To examine individual physicians' influence on do-not-resuscitate decision-making: a retrospective and observational study.

BACKGROUND: Individual physicians and physician-associated factors may influence patients'/surrogates' autonomous decision-making, thus influencing the practice of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. The objective of this study was to examine the influence of individual attending physicians on signing a DNR order. METHODS: This study was conducted in closed model, surgical intensive care units in a university-affiliated teaching hospital located in Northern Taiwan. The medical records of patients, admitted to the surgical intensive care units for the first time between June 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013 were reviewed and data collected. We used Kaplan-Meier survival curves with log-rank test and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to compare the time from surgical intensive care unit admission to do-not-resuscitate orders written for patients for each individual physician. The outcome variable was the time from surgical ICU admission to signing a DNR order. RESULTS: We found that each individual attending physician's likelihood of signing do-not-resuscitate orders for their patients was significantly different from each other. Some attending physicians were more likely to write do-not-resuscitate orders for their patients, and other attending physicians were less likely to do so. CONCLUSION: Our study reported that individual attending physicians had influence on patients'/surrogates' do-not-resuscitate decision-making. Future studies may be focused on examining the reasons associated with the difference of each individual physician in the likelihood of signing a do-not-resuscitate order.

Gender and age disparity in the initiation of life-supporting treatments: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The relationships between age and the life-supporting treatments use, and between gender and the life-supporting treatments use are still controversial. Using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as an example of life-supporting treatments, the objectives of this study were: (1) to examine the relationship between age and the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use; (2) to examine the relationship between age and the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use; and (3) to deliberate the ethical and societal implications of age and gender disparities in the initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. METHODS: This is a population-based, retrospective cohort study. Taiwan's extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cases from 2000 to 2010 were collected. The annual incidence rate of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use adjusting for both age and gender distribution for each year from 2000 to 2010 was derived using the population of 2000 as the reference population. The trend of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use was examined using time-series linear regression analysis. We conducted joinpoint regression for estimating the trend change of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use. RESULTS: The trends of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use both for different gender groups, and for different age groups have been significantly increasing over time. Men were more likely to be supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than women. Women's perspectives toward life and death, and women's perception of well-being may be associated with the phenomenon. In addition, the patients at the age of 65 or older were more likely to be supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than those younger than 65. Family autonomy/family-determination, and the Confucian tradition of filial piety and respecting elders may account for this phenomenon. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed gender and age disparities in the initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use in Taiwan, which may be accounted for by the cultural and societal values in Taiwan. For a healthcare professional who deals with patients'/family members' medical decision-making to initiate life-supporting treatments, he/she should be sensitive not only to the legality, but also the societal and ethical issues involved.

Two distinct Do-Not-Resuscitate protocols leaving less to the imagination: an observational study using propensity score matching.

BACKGROUND: Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) patients tend to receive less medical care after the order is written. To provide a clearer approach, the Ohio Department of Health adopted the Do-Not-Resuscitate law in 1998, indicating two distinct protocols of DNR orders that allow DNR patients to choose the medical care: DNR Comfort Care (DNRCC), implying DNRCC patients receive only comfort care after the order is written; and DNR Comfort Care-Arrest (DNRCC-Arrest), implying that DNRCC-Arrest patients are eligible to receive aggressive interventions until cardiac or respiratory arrest. The aim of this study was to examine the medical care provided to patients with these two distinct protocols of DNR orders. METHODS: Data were collected from August 2002 to December 2005 at a medical intensive care unit in a university-affiliated teaching hospital. In total, 188 DNRCC-Arrest patients, 88 DNRCC patients, and 2,051 non-DNR patients were included. Propensity score matching using multivariate logistic regression was used to balance the confounding variables between the 188 DNRCC-Arrest and 2,051 non-DNR patients, and between the 88 DNRCC and 2,051 non-DNR patients. The daily cost of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, the daily cost of hospital stay, the daily discretionary cost of ICU stay, six aggressive interventions, and three comfort care measures were used to indicate the medical care patients received. The association of each continuous variable and categorical variable with having a DNR order written was analyzed using Student's t-test and the χ2 test, respectively. The six aggressive interventions and three comfort care measures performed before and after the order was initiated were compared using McNemar's test. RESULTS: DNRCC patients received significantly fewer aggressive interventions and more comfort care after the order was initiated. By contrast, for DNRCC-Arrest patients, the six aggressive interventions provided were not significantly decreased, but the three comfort care measures were significantly increased after the order was initiated. In addition, the three medical costs were not significantly different between DNRCC and non-DNR patients, or between DNRCC-Arrest and non-DNR patients. CONCLUSIONS: When medical care provided to DNR patients is clearly indicated, healthcare professionals will provide the medical care determined by patient/surrogate decision-makers and healthcare professionals, rather than blindly decreasing medical care.