Use appropriate statistical analysis software such as JAMOVI to obtain an analysis of results for these 3 objectives.
Objective one:
Improve provider knowledge on predictors associated with difficult neuraxial anesthesia
Measure Objective 1: Evaluating pre- and post-survey results to measure knowledge on predictors for difficult spinal anesthesia.
Pre + post knowledge survey results :
PDF files are named in order of participants for comparison of data.
Example : Pre-survey results named (Participant 1.pdf) & post-survey results is named (post 1 or post survey 1.pdf)
These results should be compared pre and post and statistical test should be run to determine if participants had an increase in knowledge after
presentation.
Correct answer choices for questions are included in file (Survey 1 answers)
Objective 2:
Decrease attempts for spinal anesthetic placement
Measure Objective 2: Survey after US use to measure the number of attempts required for spinal placement.
Results for objective 2 can be found under the PDF named : Spinal Anesthesia Attempt Rates Results
Objective 3:
Evaluate provider utilization of checklist and ultrasound for patients’ undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Measure objective 3: Surveys will determine if providers used ultrasound when checklist predictors indicated a potential risk for difficult placement.
Results for objective 3 can be found under pdf named (survey 2 results)
****Data analysis plan can be modified to provide appropriate statisical analysis for the given results. ****
*** WRITE 1-2 PAGES EXPLAINING RESULTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED***
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS :
Qualtrics surveys will be used to evaluate all objectives in the project. To determine if provider knowledge on predictors for difficult spinal anesthesia
(objective #1) was increased a knowledge-based questionnaire will be provided pre- and post-educational presentation. Assessment of ultrasound and
checklist utilization (objective #3) will also be done through post ultrasound use surveys to determine if providers used ultrasound when checklist predictors
determined a risk for difficult placement. Objective one survey will use a knowledge-based survey on predictors for difficult spinal while objective three will us
a survey to evaluate utilization of ultrasound for patients that are difficult. Reliability of survey questions will be tested with the Cronbach’s alpha and validity
using SPSS file (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) and Pearson coefficient) (Cronach, 1951). A p-value of 0.05 or lower is considered statistically significant
(Ranganathan et al., 2015). Surveys to measure attempt rates will be assessed after a month that project has been implemented (Objective 2). Data will
determine if the checklist was used and if the ultrasound was able to decrease attempts in the event of a moderate or high-risk patient for difficult spinal
placement.
The statistical software analysis program JAMOVI will be employed to test the significance of data retrieved. Data analysis will be put together on an SPSS
version 27.0 file (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) to be able to properly input into the JAMOVI software. Association between attempt rates and use of ultrasound and
checklist to decrease number of punctures necessary to reach the intrathecal space will be done with the Chi-square test. Pre- and post- survey results will
be analyzed using the paired t-test for the educational survey on knowledge improvement for difficult spinal predictors. This test can be implemented
assuming the data is normally distributed and provided to the same group of participants after the educational presentation (Neuhauser, 2011). Improved
ultrasound utilization will be assessed through surveys measuring if ultrasound was used on patients graded as moderate or high risk and analyzed using the
paired- test as well. Non-normal distribution can be tested through nonparametric test such as Mann-Whitney U (Mann & Whitney, 1947) that evaluates data
between two groups with no specific distributio