Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 4 Task-specific clinical skill performance and global procedural performance

From: The benefit of repetitive skills training and frequency of expert feedback in the early acquisition of procedural skills

Task-specific clinical skill performance (binary checklists)
  High-frequency feedback group (HFF group) N = 23 Low-frequency feedback group (LFF group) N = 24 p-value 1
Peyton’s step 4 (T1) 91.06 ± 7.48 91.42 ± 9.14 .851
Final, 6th repetition (T2) 99.22 ± 2.25 96.04 ± 4.96 .093
p value1 <.001 <.001  
Global procedural performance (global rating)
  High-frequency feedback group (HFF group) N = 23 Low-frequency feedback group (LFF group) N = 24 p-value 2
Peyton’s step 4 (T1) 5.31 ± 0.50 5.30 ± .64 .941
Final, 6th repetition (T2) 5.95 ± 0.07 5.65 ± .48 <.004
p value3 <.001 .002  
  1. 1LSD-post-hoc Tests.
  2. 2Mann-Whitney-U Test.
  3. 3Wilcoxon signed-rank test (T1 vs. T2).
  4. Performance ratings of the two groups in Peyton’s step 4 (T1) and in the final, 6th repetition (T2) in task-specific clinical skill performance (binary checklist rating as mean score in percent of maximum achievable points and standard deviation; checklist of 16 items with a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 16 points; ANOVA, p-values) and global procedural performance (global performance rating as mean score of global rating scales ± standard deviation; six-point Likert scale from 6 = very good to 1 = unsatisfactory; M-W-U-Test, p-values).