Stress and value: the student perspective on utilizing real vs. actor patients in objective structured clinical examinations

Abstract

BackgroundStudies have shown objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) to be one of the most reliable tools in assessing clinical performance; however in Pediatrics they primarily use manikins, simulators or parent actors which limits the comprehensiveness of the assessment. In our Pediatric Clerkship, medical students are evaluated using a standardized rubric during a clinical evaluation exercise (CEX) with real patients. This study assessed medical students’ perceived stress levels and the educational value of the CEX compared an OSCE. We hypothesized there would be equal stress and value for students with the CEX experience compared to the OSCE.MethodsThird year students anonymously completed questionnaires after required Pediatric CEX and Internal Medicine OSCE evaluations from July 2016-June 2017. The questionnaire included questions from the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory, a validated tool used to assess feelings of stress and perceived value of an exercise.ResultsA total of 147 and 145 questionnaires were completed after the CEX and OSCE. There were no differences between groups regarding levels of “nervousness” (p = 0.543) and “relaxation” (p = 0.055); students felt more “at ease” (p = 0.002) and less “pressure” (p < 0.001) during the CEX. Students perceived the CEX to be more useful and important to improve skills compared to the OSCE for the history taking, physical exam and interpersonal skills.ConclusionsOur results indicate that the CEX was associated with lower stress levels and had higher perceived value when compared to the OSCE. This study supports the usefulness of incorporating real patients into the clinical evaluation of medical students.