Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the use of an objective structured clinical examination for Internal Medicine residents (IM-OSCE) as a progress test for clinical skills. Methods: Data from eight administrations of an IM-OSCE were analyzed retrospectively. Data were scaled to a mean of 500 and standard deviation (SD) of 100. A time-based comparison, treating post-graduate year (PGY) as a repeated-measures factor, was used to determine how residents’ performance progressed over time. Results: Residents’ total IM-OSCE scores (n = 244) increased over training from a mean of 445 (SD = 84) in PGY-1 to 534 (SD = 71) in PGY-3 (p < 0.001). In an analysis of sub-scores, including only those who participated in the IM OSCE for all three years of training (n = 46), mean structured oral scores increased from 464 (SD = 92) to 533 (SD = 83) (p < 0.001), physical examination scores increased from 464 (SD = 82) to 520 (SD = 75) (p < 0.001), and procedural skills increased from 495 (SD = 99) to 555 (SD = 67) (p = 0.033). There was no significant change in communication scores (p = 0.97). Conclusions: The IM-OSCE can be used to demonstrate progression of clinical skills throughout residency training. Although most of the clinical skills assessed improved as residents progressed through their training, communication skills did not appear to change. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Context Selected-response ( SR) formats (e.g. multiple-choice questions) and constructed-response ( CR) formats (e.g. short-answer questions) are commonly used to test the knowledge of examinees. Scores on SR formats are typically higher than scores on CR formats. This difference is often attributed to examinees being cued by options within an SR question, but there could be alternative explanations. The purpose of this study was to expand on previous work with regards to the cueing effect of SR formats by directly contrasting conditions that support cueing versus memory of previously seen questions. Methods During an objective structured clinical examination, students ( n = 144) completed two consecutive stations in which they were presented with the same written cases but in different formats. Group 1 students were presented with CR questions followed by SR questions. Group 2 students were presented with questions in reverse order. Participants were asked to describe their testing experience. Results Selected-response scores ( M = 4.21/10) were statistically higher than the CR scores ( M = 3.82/10). However, there was no significant interaction between sequence and format ( F(1,142) = 1.59, p = 0.21 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context The objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) requires the use of standardised patients (SPs). Recruitment of SPs can be challenging and factors assumed to be neutral may vary between SPs. On stations that are considered gender-neutral, either male or female SPs may be used. This may lead to an increase in measurement error. Prior studies on SP gender have often confounded gender with case. Objective The objective of this study was to assess whether a variation in SP gender on the same case resulted in a systematic difference in student scores. Methods At the University of Ottawa, 140 Year 3 medical students participated in a 10-station OSCE. Two physical examination stations were selected for study because they were perceived to be ‘gender-neutral’. One station involved the physical examination of the back and the other of the lymphatic system. On each of the study stations, male and female SPs were randomly allocated. Results There was no difference in mean scores on the back examination station for students with female (6.96/10.00) versus male (7.04/10.00) SPs ( P = 0.713). However, scores on the lymphatic system examination station showed a significant difference, favouring students with female (8.30/10.00) versus male (7.41/10.00) SPs ( P < 0.001). Results were not dependent on student gender. Conclusions The gender of the SP may significantly affect student performance in an undergraduate OSCE in a manner that appears to be unrelated to student gender. It would be prudent to use the same SP gender for the same case, even on seemingly gender-neutral stations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Medical school admissions committees are increasingly considering noncognitive measures like emotional intelligence (EI) in evaluating potential applicants. This study explored whether scores on an EI abilities test at admissions predicted future academic performance in medical school to determine whether EI could be used in making admissions decisions., Method: The authors invited all University of Ottawa medical school applicants offered an interview in 2006 and 2007 to complete the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso EI Test (MSCEIT) at the time of their interview (105 and 101, respectively), then again at matriculation (120 and 106, respectively). To determine predictive validity, they correlated MSCEIT scores to scores on written examinations and objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) administered during the four-year program. They also correlated MSCEIT scores to the number of nominations for excellence in clinical performance and failures recorded over the four years., Results: The authors found no significant correlations between MSCEIT scores and written examination scores or number of failures. The correlations between MSCEIT scores and total OSCE scores ranged from 0.01 to 0.35; only MSCEIT scores at matriculation and OSCE year 4 scores for the 2007 cohort were significantly correlated. Correlations between MSCEIT scores and clinical nominations were low (range 0.12-0.28); only the correlation between MSCEIT scores at matriculation and number of clinical nominations for the 2007 cohort were statistically significant., Conclusions: EI, as measured by an abilities test at admissions, does not appear to reliably predict future academic performance. Future studies should define the role of EI in admissions decisions.

Recruitment of physician examiners for an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) can be difficult. The following study will explore reasons why physicians volunteer their time to be OSCE examiners. A questionnaire was collected from 110 examiners including a fourth year formative student OSCE (SO) (n=49), formative internal medicine OSCE (IM) (n=21) and the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Exam Part II (MCCQE II) (n=40). A 5-point Likert scale was used. Statements with high mean ratings overall included: enjoy being an examiner (4.05), gain insights into learners' skills and knowledge (4.27), and examine out of a sense of duty (4.10). The MCC participants produced higher ratings (p<0.05). Overall, OSCE examiners volunteer their time because they enjoy the experience, feel a sense of duty and gain insight into learners' skills and knowledge. The MCC examiners appear to value the experience more. The ability to provide feedback and the provision of CME credits were not significant factors for increasing examiner satisfaction.

Background: Effective education of clinical skills is essential if doctors are to meet the needs of patients with rheumatic disease, but shrinking faculty numbers has made clinical teaching difficult. A solution to this problem is to utilize patient educators., Purpose: This study evaluates the teaching effectiveness of patient educators compared to rheumatology faculty using the musculoskeletal (MSK) examination., Method: Sixty-two 2nd-year medical students were randomized to receive instruction from patient educators or faculty. Tutorial groups received instructions during three, 3-hr sessions. Clinical skills were evaluated by a 9 station objective structured clinical examination. Students completed a tutor evaluation form to assess their level of satisfaction with the process., Results: Faculty-taught students received a higher overall mark (66.5% vs. 62.1%,) and fewer failed than patient educator-taught students (5 vs. 0, p = 0.02). Students rated faculty educators higher than patient educators (4.13 vs. 3.58 on a 5-point Likert scale)., Conclusion: Rheumatology faculty appear to be more effective teachers of the MSK physical exam than patient educators.