Skip to main content
. 2016 Apr 6;6(3):132–137. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem.2016.03.002

Table 3.

Summary of practical scores for trainees participating in their first workshop.a

Training Session
Sept 2013
Mar 2014
Jun 2014
Nov 2014
Number of Trainees 22 36 5 17
Practical Skills (IN) Scores
Mean Raw scores not recorded 2.2 2.5 2.6
SD 0.59 0.43 0.41
95% CI of mean 1.98–2.39 2.04–2.93 2.38–2.80
Minimum 0.6 2.0 1.7
Median 2.3 2.5 2.7
95% CI of median 2.0–2.6 2.0–2.9 2.4–2.9



Practical Skills (IM) Scores
Mean Raw scores not recorded 2.34 2.28 2.69
SD 0.58 0.54 0.38
95% CI of mean 2.14–2.54 1.71–2.85 2.49–2.88
Minimum 0.5 1.6 2.0
Median 2.3 2.2 2.7
95% CI of median 2.1–2.6 1.6–2.9 2.5–2.9



Practical Skills (Ave) Scores
Mean Raw scores not recorded 2.26 2.38 2.64b
SD 0.54 0.42 0.38
95% CI of mean 2.08–2.45 1.94–2.82 2.45–2.83
Minimum 0.6 1.9 1.9
Median 2.3 2.33 2.65
95% CI of median 2.05–2.45 1.9-2.9 2.5–2.9
Practical Skills (P/F)c N (column %)
Passed 13 (59%) 23 (66%) 4 (80%) 15 (88%)d
Failed 9 (41%) 12 (34%) 1 (20%) 2 (12%)
a

No new trainees participated in December 2013.

b

Pairwise comparisons using a t-test (parametric) and the Mann–Whitney test (non-parametric) showed a significant difference between March and November; t-test p = 0.012; Mann–Whitney, p = 0.008.

c

Pass = Average of IN and IM of 2.0 or greater.

d

Chi-square, September vs. November, p = 0.099.