title: Raising the bar: reassessing standards for procedural competence.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  How often passing standards for clinical skills examinations should be reexamined is unknown.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The goal is to determine if improved resident performance affects the passing standard imposed by expert judges.
  
  
  METHODS
  In 2006, we set a passing standard for a central venous catheter insertion clinical skills examination using an expert panel. From 2007 to 2010, trainee scores improved steadily. In 2010, a new expert panel provided judgments for the examination using 4 consecutive years of resident performance data. Interrater reliabilities and test-retest reliability (stability) were calculated. Passing standards from 2006 and 2010 were compared.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Judgments provided were reliable and stable. The new passing standard was 88% for internal jugular and 87% for subclavian central venous catheter insertion compared to 79% for both sites in 2006.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Cumulative performance data influenced experts to set a more stringent minimum passing standard. Standards should be regularly reviewed to ensure they are fair and appropriately rigorous.
authors: Department of Medicine , Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
authors: Elaine R
authors: ER
authors: Cohen
authors: Jeffrey H
authors: JH
authors: Barsuk
authors: William C
authors: WC
authors: McGaghie
authors: Diane B
authors: DB
authors: Wayne
mesh_terms: D002405:Catheterization, Central Venous / Q000592:standards*; D057189:Checklist; D002641:Chicago; D002983:Clinical Competence / Q000592:standards*; D004521:Educational Measurement / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D007396:Internship and Residency; D015203:Reproducibility of Results