{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03255484784147204, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009200283085633405, 'mean_word_length': 5.094827586206897, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Validation of an Assessment Tool for Field Endotracheal Intubation.

OBJECTIVES
Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is an important skill for all emergency providers; our ability to train and assess our learners is integral to providing optimal patient care. The primary aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability (IRR) and discriminant validity of a novel field ETI assessment tool using a checklist-derived performance score (PS) and critical failure (CF) rate.


METHODS
Forty-three participants (18 paramedic students, 11 paramedics, and 14 emergency physicians [EPs]) performed ETI during a simulated trauma scenario on a pseudo-ventilated cadaver. Each participant was assessed by two experienced raters. IRR was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Regarding discriminant validity, a Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze PSs and a χ2 test was used for CFs. Mean global rating scale (GRS) scores were compared using an analysis of variance.


RESULTS
The ETI assessment tool had excellent IRR, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94. There was a significant difference in PSs, CFs, and GRSs (p < 0.05) between cohorts.


CONCLUSION
The novel field ETI assessment tool has excellent reliability among trained raters and discriminates between experienced ETI providers (EPs) and less experienced ETI performers using PSs, CFs, and GRSs on a fresh cadaveric model.