Abstract
BackgroundSurgeons rarely have time to assess/rate trainee performance. From a 10 year-experience of implementing OSCE style assessments, we hypothesize that the accurate scoring of interns in selected tests is not affected by the rater's medical background. MethodsA prospective collection of quantitative scoring data by both medical school graduates and college students was compared. Each rater underwent training and then watched three videos of actors performing in each of two OSCE stations and individually scored them. ResultsTwelve college students and 16 medical graduates participated. There was no difference in the mean scores between rating groups for chest tube insertion (Video 1: 1.7 vs. 2.0; Video 2: 2.9 vs 3.1; Video 3: 6.1 vs 6.1; p = 0.8) and cricothyrotomy (Video 1: 4.0 vs 4.5; Video 2: 4.8 vs 5.1; Video 3: 9.2 vs 9.1; p = 0.7). ConclusionAccurate scoring of surgical performance does not mandate a medical background. Given the limited availability of attending surgeons for assessments, use of validated, simple checklists can help raters with minimal medical experience perform assessments proficiently.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
