Validation of an evaluation instrument for responders in tactical casualty care simulations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3052.3251Keywords:
Rubric, Validation, Emergency Services, Simulation, Terrorism, TrainingAbstract
Objective: to construct and validate a tool for the evaluation of responders in tactical casualty care simulations. Method: three rubrics for the application of a tourniquet, an emergency bandage and haemostatic agents recommended by the Hartford Consensus were developed and validated. Validity and reliability were studied. Validation was performed by 4 experts in the field and 36 nursing participants who were selected through convenience sampling. Three rubrics with 8 items were evaluated (except for the application of an emergency bandage, for which 7 items were evaluated). Each simulation was evaluated by 3 experts. Results: an excellent score was obtained for the correlation index for the 3 simulations and 2 levels that were evaluated (competent and expert). The mean score for the application of a tourniquet was 0.897, the mean score for the application of an emergency bandage was 0.982, and the mean score for the application of topical haemostats was 0.805. Conclusion: this instrument for the evaluation of nurses in tactical casualty care simulations is considered useful, valid and reliable for training in a prehospital setting for both professionals who lack experience in tactical casualty care and those who are considered to be experts.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.