Objective Structured Clinical Examination Assessment Research Articles

Improving marking effectiveness and feedback provision in an OSCE assessment using Microsoft Forms: A pilot study in Sport and Exercise Therapy

An objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has been recognised as a reliable but workload-intensive assessment method across health sciences studies. Though a variety of digital marking tools have been employed to improve marking and feedback provision for OSCEs, many of these require specialist software or maintenance. This pilot study examines the development and trialling of Microsoft Forms as a marking and feedback instrument for an OSCE within a Sport and Exercise Therapy module. This study aims to assess whether the use of a non-specialist digital tool, such as Microsoft Forms, might be able overcome limitations in current assessment procedures and ultimately provide a more effective method for marking and feedback provision for an OSCE. Results from OSCE examiners (N = 8) and students (N = 30) who participated in the pilot indicate that Microsoft Forms does have the potential to provide a more effective experience for examiners and ultimately improve upon feedback provision for students when compared with a paper-based marking tool. However, concerns around the form’s ease-of-use may ultimately influence its adoption as a marking instrument above current paper-based methods.

Measuring the Quality of the OSCE in a Chiropractic Programme: A Review of Metrics and Recommendations.

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a commonly used assessment of clinical skill, and ensuring the quality and reliability in OSCEs is a complex, and on-going process. This paper discusses scoring schemas and reviews checklists and global rating scales (GRS) for marking. Also detailed are post-examination quality assurance metrics tailored to smaller cohorts, with an illustrative dataset. A deidentified OSCE dataset, from stations with both a checklist and GRS, of 24 examinees from a 2021 cohort was assessed using the following metrics: Cut-scores or pass-rates, number-of-failures, R2, inter-grade discrimination, and between-group-variation. The results were used to inform a set of implementable recommendations to improve future OSCEs. For most stations the calculated cut-score calculated was higher than the traditional pass of 50% (58.9.8-68.4%). Number-of-failures were low for traditional pass rates and cuts-scores (0.00-16.7%), excepting Lab Analysis where number-of-failures was 50.0%. R2 values ranged from 0.67-0.97, but proportion of total variance was high (67.3-95.9). These data suggest there were potential missed teaching concepts, that station marking was open to examiner interpretation, and there were inconsistencies in examiner marking.Recommendations included increasing checklist detail and using a weighted marking scale, separating some stations into dichotomous and key-feature checklists, using GRSs specific to each station, and reviewing all future OSCEs with the metrics described to guide refinements. The analysis used revealed several potential issues with the OSCE assessment. These findings informed recommendations to improve the quality of future examinations.

A Comparison of Checklist and Domain-Based Ratings in the Assessment of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) Performance.

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is the mainstay of clinical assessment in the final-year undergraduate Family Medicine clerkship at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre (KFSHRC). The gold standard for OSCE assessment is the checklist rating, completed by physician examiners. Numerous studies have suggested that global or domain-based OSCE ratings may be a better indicator of competence than checklist ratings. The aim of this study was to examine the utility of domain-based OSCE ratings in the context of final-year, undergraduate, Family Medicine OSCE examinations in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This is akin to an exercise in quality improvement, as we continuously look for ways to improve our OSCE assessment processes. This study utilised a quantitative methodology. Three final year OSCE exams were chosen. Physicians rated each student using a checklist score and using a more holistic domain-based score. Physician checklist scores and physician domain-based scores were then compared, and correlation was assessed. We also looked at the internal consistency of the scoring methods. A significant correlation was found between checklist and domain-based scores by physicians for all exams (r=0.858, p<0.01), with a good internal consistency for these methodologies for all exams. The results demonstrate that both checklist and domain-based scores offer some benefit to the assessment, with a similar internal consistency and strong correlation. Domain-based ratings should be utilised for softer skills that are not easily assessed by checklists. There is clearly a need to rethink our OSCE assessment. The assessment should combine checklist and domain-based physician scores. As trainees become more experienced, checklist OSCE may penalise directness and efficiency, while domain-based ratings would offer a better appraisal of competence, and have been shown to be more sensitive to the level of training and expertise. Changing the assessment methods will lead to necessary changes in the student approach to the OSCE and improve authenticity and validity.

Application of objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for the evaluation of Kampo medicine training

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to develop an objective, content-valid, and reliable assessment method for Kampo medicine using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for the assessment of clinical competence in Kampo medicine.MethodsWe developed a blueprint followed by a list of 47 assessment items and three task scenarios related to clinical competence in Kampo medicine. An eight-member test committee checked the relevance of the assessment items on a Likert scale. We calculated a content validity index and content validity ratio, and used the Angoff method to set the passing threshold. We trained a total of nine simulated patients with three assigned to each scenario. We conducted an OSCE for 11 candidates with varying medical abilities, and conducted three stations per person, which were evaluated by one evaluator in one room by direct observation. We used video recordings to test the inter-rater reliability of the three raters. We used the test results to verify the reliability of the assessment chart.ResultsThe inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [2,1]) was 0.973. The reliability of the assessment chart for each scenario (Cronbach’s α) was 0.86, 0.89, and 0.85 for Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The reliability of the assessment chart for the whole OSCE (Cronbach’s α) was 0.90.ConclusionsWe developed a content-valid new OSCE assessment method for Kampo medicine and obtained high inter-rater and test reliabilities. Our findings suggest that this is one of the most reliable evaluation methods for assessing clinical competence in Kampo medicine.

A systematic review of effective quality feedback measurement tools used in clinical skills assessment

Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a valid tool to assess the clinical skills of medical students. Feedback after OSCE is essential for student improvement and safe clinical practice. Many examiners do not provide helpful or insightful feedback in the text space provided after OSCE stations, which may adversely affect learning outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best determinants for quality written feedback in the field of medicine.   Methods: PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINHAL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for relevant literature up to February 2021. We included studies that described the quality of good/effective feedback in clinical skills assessment in the field of medicine. Four independent reviewers extracted determinants used to assess the quality of written feedback. The percentage agreement and kappa coefficients were calculated for each determinant. The ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Results: 14 studies were included in this systematic review. 10 determinants were identified for assessing feedback. The determinants with the highest agreement among reviewers were specific, described gap, balanced, constructive and behavioural; with kappa values of 0.79, 0.45, 0.33, 0.33 and 0.26 respectively. All other determinants had low agreement (kappa values below 0.22) indicating that even though they have been used in the literature, they might not be applicable for good quality feedback. The risk of bias was low or moderate overall. Conclusions: This work suggests that good quality written feedback should be specific, balanced, and constructive in nature, and should describe the gap in student learning as well as observed behavioural actions in the exams.  Integrating these determinants in OSCE assessment will help guide and support educators for providing effective feedback for the learner.

137 Simulated Surgical Assessment Unit – A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Medical Student Confidence In Assessment and Management of Acute Surgical Conditions Through High-Fidelity Simulation

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in limited opportunities for medical students to assess patients in the Surgical Assessment Unit (SAU) at an acute teaching hospital. Inadequate exposure to acute surgical conditions affected student-reported confidence and preparedness for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). We hypothesized that simulation-based teaching during the pandemic could supplement disrupted learning The aim of the study was to address the quality dimension of patient safety. This Quality Improvement Project (QIP) was designed to increase student confidence by 50% in the assessment and management of acute surgical conditions, and preparedness for OSCE.The educational intervention ‘Simulated SAU’, consisting of scenarios based on common acute surgical presentations, was co-designed with project champion, placement lead, teaching fellows and medical education department, utilizing transformational leadership. Model for improvement approach was utilized with Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. During the first PDSA cycle, intervention was delivered over 3-hour sessions in March 2021 to 12 third-year medical students, through the use of simulated patients. The second cycle encompassed integration of learning points including amended scenario and debrief timings, and improved questionnaires, delivered in April 2021 to a further 11 third-year medical students. Students completed paired 14-item pre- and post-intervention paper questionnaires consisting of 5-point Likert scale questions on confidence and preparedness. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical analysis, with a p-value of &lt;0.05 considered statistically significant.During the first cycle, student-reported median confidence in assessment increased by 50% (p = 0.01), and in management by 66.7% (p = 0.02). Students felt 50% more prepared for OSCE assessment (p = 0.02). During second cycle, median confidence in assessment increased by 100% (p = 0.003), in management by 100% (p = 0.004), and students felt 50% more prepared for OSCE assessment (p = 0.015). 100% of students felt simulated SAU is useful and future sessions would further enhance surgical learning.The QIP achieved its aim to increase student confidence with statistically significant differences, through a high-fidelity simulation intervention. Through QI methodology and leadership for improvement, this QIP has successfully bridged the educational gap resulting from the pandemic, with emphasis on delivering safe patient care. Next steps encompass integration of learning points over the following PDSA cycle, engagement of new staff and resource sharing for future implementation and sustainability. Simulated SAU intervention is low-cost, requires minimal staff and is simple to deliver, hence has the potential to become integrated within medical education across numerous educational settings and enhance patient safety.

The 3-D Skills Model: a Randomised Controlled Pilot Study Comparing a Novel 1\u20131 Near-Peer Teaching Model to a Formative OSCE with Self-regulated Practice

IntroductionNear-peer teaching is a popular pedagogical teaching tool, with well-recognised benefits for students and tutors. There are multiple existing models to structure these interventions, but it is often unclear how they translate to academic attainment. We designed a novel near-peer teaching model that expands on previous research.MethodsOur model was piloted in a formative Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) setting, trialled on 22 pre-clinical medical students to establish feasibility, acceptability and descriptive outcomes that could inform the design of a larger study. Students were randomly assigned to intervention or control cohorts. Each cohort undertook 5 min formative OSCE assessments with either 3 additional minutes of structured teaching or 3 min of self-regulated practice before reattempting the first OSCE station. Checklist marking sheets for 1st and 2nd sittings were collected by independent external markers, in addition to a global assessment rating in which we used the Borderline Regression Method to establish the station pass mark.ResultsA quantitative and qualitative result analysis was performed, demonstrating that students gained on average 3 additional marks after teaching with this model. Students and student-tutors reported increased confidence, high course satisfaction and evidence of reflective practice.DiscussionWe established acceptability and feasibility outcomes. The descriptive outcomes will support the design of a larger, adequately powered study required to demonstrate translation to summative exam performance.

Evaluation of Consecutive Guided Training to Improve Interrater Agreement in Identifying Elements of Situation Awareness in Objective Structured Clinical Examination Assessments.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction: Little is known about the medical student's cognitive ability in diagnostic and therapeutic accuracy. Literature does not suggest a methodology to quantify students' cognitive processing. Situation Awareness (SA) is described as having the proficiency to obtain awareness of the surrounding and to integrate this consciousness into the situational context and potential forthcoming development. OSCEs might be a suitable instrument to evaluate students' awareness of the situation. Methods: Consecutive guided training was provided to obtain a consistent comprehension of the model of SA. 4 independent researchers consecutively examined 6 randomised OSCE forms in a qualitative and quantitative method. Final interrater agreement was expressed as Cohens kappa. Generalisability theory determined the impact of the main facets on the variation in disagreement. Results: Evaluation of identifying and categorising elements of SA within OSCE forms demonstrated a moderate to very good interrater agreement. The G-Theory revealed key facets for variance: OSCE forms, Levels of SA, Items embedded in the Levels, Interaction between Forms and Levels and Forms and Items embedded within Levels. Conclusion: Consecutive guided training improved the identification of elements of SA within OSCE assessments. Further research is necessary to improve the assessment of SA in undergraduate medical curricula.

Evolution of an obstetrics and gynecology interprofessional simulation-based education session for medical and nursing students.

Simulation and Objective Structured Clinical Examination assessment of learners can teach clinical skills proficiency in a safe environment without risk to patients. Interprofessional simulation-based education (IPSE) contributes to a transformation in students’ understanding of teamwork and professional roles. Long term outcomes for stimulation and IPSE sessions, are less well studied. We hypothesized that a progressive interprofessional education simulation program incorporating both faculty and interprofessional student collaboration would improve medical students’ knowledge retention, comfort with procedural skills, positive teamwork and respectful interaction between students.An Obstetrics and Gynecology IPSE for medical and nursing students (NS) was developed in collaboration between a school of medicine and a school of nursing from 2014 to 2017. By 2017, content included(1)fetal heart rate case-based workshop;(2)simulated vaginal delivery;(3)cervical examination and assessment;(4)contraception station including intrauterine device insertion practice;(5)obstetric procedures including hands-on B-Lynch Suture practice.From 2014 to 2016, medical students completed attitude, knowledge, and perception surveys both pre and immediately post simulation, at 4 months, and 8 months. In 2017; all students completed self-assessments and received faculty-assessments.The program trained 443 medical and 136 NS. Medical students’ knowledge, comfort, and interest increased significantly post simulation. Outcome scores decreased but were still significantly improved at 4 months but nearly dissipated by 8 months. There were no significant differences between medical and NS self-assessment or faculty-assessment scores regarding IUD insertion, cervical examination, or contraception quiz scores. Medical students’ birth simulation self-assessment versus faculty-assessment scores were 8.6 vs 8.9, P < .001.Simulation improved students’ short-term medical knowledge, comfort, and perception with some long-term persistence at 4–8 months. Medical and NS learned obstetrics and gynecology skills in a collaborative environment and in role-specific situations. Medical students had the opportunity to learn from NS. Positive teamwork and respectful interaction occurred between the students.

Examiners’ Perceptions in Surgical Education: The Blind Spot in the Assessment of OSCEs

Interpreting objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) scores remains a challenging task.1 It remains unclear how examiners make a decision to score an OSCE the way they do. The examiners' thoughts and decision-making processes remain a hidden part of the OSCE assessment. One cannot assume that all examiners have a shared belief about what is important in an OSCE or what is the aim of an OSCE assessment. These differences are problematic, since they lead to students not getting the 'correct' score for their OSCE. Using a qualitative case study design,2 this study aims to gain in-depth insight into examiners' perceptions of OSCEs and their role as an examiner. For this purpose, semi-structured interviews with OSCE observers (n = 6) were conducted. The results show that the perception of examiners on the aim of OSCES and their motivation and task as examiner are crucial in understanding the differences among OSCE scores of examiners. Training and discussion among the examiners are needed to decrease the differences among the OSCE scores of examiners.

Does the performance assessment of students during surgery clerkship in a medical faculty jeopardize the objectivity of unbiased structured clinical examination?

Aim: Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has become an important assessment method in medicine which is more reliable than traditional exams. Faculty members make an opinion about the students during their clerkship. We aimed to investigate whether their judgments affect the scoring in the OSCE application.Material and Methods: The study was planned prospectively. 4th-year students participating in the OSCE was identified as the working group. At the end of the clerkship, the faculty members gave a performance assessment (PA) score including the professional attitude of the students. PA and OSCE scores were compared. Two other faculty members participated all OSCE stations as external evaluators.Results: There was a difference between OSCE and PA scores. Fewer students were successful at OSCE than PA (p=0.002). While the mean PA scores of three of the five faculty members were statistically similar, other two were different. The scores given by the responsible faculty members and the external evaluators from the faculty of internal medicine were similar (p>0.05). The evaluators from the surgical faculty gave lower scores statistically different from both groups (p0.05). There was a strong relationship between the scores given by the faculty members responsible for the OSCE application and the faculty members from the surgical faculty (r=0.936; p0.001) and those from the internal medicine faculty (r=0.947; p0.001).Conclusion: PA scores of the faculty members did not affect the OSCE scores which were supported by the external observers. The OSCE assessment was not influenced by the PA, and was found to be reliable.

The evaluation of e-learning resources as an adjunct to otolaryngology teaching: a pilot study

BackgroundThe concept of e-Learning has been rapidly accepted as an important component of medical education and is especially adept at teaching clinical skills. However, their impact on learning, particularly in Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS) medical school curriculum, has yet to be adequately explored. The aim of this pilot study is to develop interactive e-Learning resources and evaluate their impact in enhancing OHNS teaching in medical school.MethodsThis pilot study is a randomized controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of e-Learning resources in enhancing the current traditional lecture and tutorial-based teaching of OHNS in medical school. Nineteen final-year medical students from the University of Sydney were recruited for this study, who were randomly allocated into intervention group with additional e-Learning resources (Group A) and control group (Group B). Student knowledge was assessed through objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) with use of standardized forms for objective scoring. Assessors were blinded to student randomization status. A post-study questionnaire was distributed to assess student feedback on the e-Learning resources.ResultsEight students were allocated to Group A and 11 students to Group B. Group A performed significantly better than Group B in the overall examination scores (78.50 ± 13.88 v. 55.82 ± 8.23; P = < 0.01). With the minimum pass mark of 65%, the majority of students in Group A was able to pass the OSCE assessments, while the majority of students in Group B failed (87.50% v. 9.10%; P = 0.01). The post-test questionnaire on the e-Learning resources showed very favorable feedback from the students’ perspective.ConclusionResults from our pilot study suggests that the use of interactive online e-Learning resources can be a valuable adjunct in supplementing OHNS teaching in medical school, as they are readily accessible and allow flexible on-demand learning. Future studies involving large numbers of medical students are needed to validate these results.

Pharmacy Students’ Perception and Evaluation of Objective Structured Clinical Examination: Near East University Experience

Background: Pharmacy educators have always been desirous of the best methods for formative and summative evaluation of trainees. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is an approach for student assessment in which aspects of clinical competence are evaluated in a comprehensive, consistent, and structured manner. Though recently become popular in pharmacy schools globally, its use in North Cyprus and Turkey pharmacy schools appears limited.&#x0D; Objectives: To assess pharmacy students’ evaluation and overall perception of OSCE.&#x0D; Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on pharmacy students, who participated in the final OSCE examination in 2015-2016.The study sample consisted of fifth-year Pharmacy students who took the OSCE assessment during their studies. A24-item self-administered structured questionnaire was employed to obtain relevant data on OSCE evaluation in terms of content reliability and structure of the examination. Students’ responses were based on a 4-point Likert scales ranging from disagree to no comment. The data were analyzed using SPSS, version 22.&#x0D; Results: Of 81 eligible students, 74 completed self- administered questionnaire representing 91.35% response rate. A total of 68(90.7%) students agreed that wide knowledge area and clinical skills were covered in the exam. Over 80% of the students saw that OSCE besides it provided them with an opportunity to learn real life scenario, it was well administered and run in the faculty and better organized compared to a previous pilot OSCE (68%). Around 77% of the students saw that 7 minutes time allocated per station was adequate, while a close percentage also agreed that standardized patients were competent in their role playing. Majority of students though they identify that OSCEs highlighted areas of weakness in their skills and knowledge but still disagree with incorporating OSCEs marks into final marks and thus prefer it as an formative assessment.&#x0D; Conclusions: Students highly perceived the exam feeling that it is more resembles actual practice providing them with self-confidence, and more clearly their defects and what they need to improve regarding both skills and knowledge. They saw OSCEs as being a beneficial formative assessment that should not be included as marks into finals.

Summative Objective Structured Clinical Examination Assessment: A Mini Review

The end of any form of rigorous, specific, and high-stakes process of systematic and structured instruction is characterized by a summative assessment to evaluate the learner’s ability to apply the body of knowledge or clinical skills encountered and interacted with over a specific duration and to progress to the next phase of training. The aim of this project is to analyze the design, validity, delivery, supervision, and feedback of a summative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessment. The results of this analysis showed a satisfactory and widely accepted method of assessment in medical education despite a few shortcomings. All forms of assessment have their inherent strengths and weaknesses, but it is essential that these assessments encourage future learning. Summative assessment has been proven to be a valid, comprehensive, and reliable method, and most importantly, it allows direct observation and evaluation of procedural and clinical skills.

Examiner seniority and experience are associated with bias when scoring communication, but not examination, skills in objective structured clinical examinations in Australia.

PurposeThe biases that may influence objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) scoring are well understood, and recent research has attempted to establish the magnitude of their impact. However, the influence of examiner experience, clinical seniority, and occupation on communication and physical examination scores in OSCEs has not yet been clearly established.MethodsWe compared the mean scores awarded for generic and clinical communication and physical examination skills in 2 undergraduate medicine OSCEs in relation to examiner characteristics (gender, examining experience, occupation, seniority, and speciality). The statistical significance of the differences was calculated using the 2-tailed independent t-test and analysis of variance.ResultsFive hundred and seventeen students were examined by 237 examiners at the University of New South Wales in 2014 and 2016. Examiner gender, occupation (academic, clinician, or clinical tutor), and job type (specialist or generalist) did not significantly impact scores. Junior doctors gave consistently higher scores than senior doctors in all domains, and this difference was statistically significant for generic and clinical communication scores. Examiner experience was significantly inversely correlated with generic communication scores.ConclusionWe suggest that the assessment of examination skills may be less susceptible to bias because this process is fairly prescriptive, affording greater scoring objectivity. We recommend training to define the marking criteria, teaching curriculum, and expected level of performance in communication skills to reduce bias in OSCE assessment.

Summative Objective Structured Clinical Examination Assessment at the End of Anesthesia Residency for Perioperative Ultrasound

While standardized examinations and data from simulators and phantom models can assess knowledge and manual skills for ultrasound, an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) could assess workflow understanding. We recruited 8 experts to develop an OSCE to assess workflow understanding in perioperative ultrasound. The experts used a binary grading system to score 19 graduating anesthesia residents at 6 stations. Overall average performance was 86.2%, and 3 stations had an acceptable internal reliability (Kuder-Richardson formula 20 coefficient >0.5). After refinement, this OSCE can be combined with standardized examinations and data from simulators and phantom models to assess proficiency in ultrasound.

Integrated training (practicing, peer clinical training and OSCE assessment): a ladder to promote learning and training.

Introduction The teaching-learning process plays an effective role in training nursing students. Devising novel methods can lead to achievement of educational objectives as well as promotion of the clinical and practical training. The present study is aimed to determine the effect of integrated training, including practicing, peer clinical training and objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessment. Methods The interventional study was conducted on 58 freshman students. Two groups underwent a five-stage educational process; so that, all the students were trained and practiced in the skills lab, and their practical skills were investigated via the OSCE test. Afterwards, for clinical training in hospital, they were randomly divided into two groups of routine training (n = 26) and the peer-learning method (n = 32). Subsequently, in order to investigate the outcomes of the process, the OSCE test scores of the two training groups were compared both before and after the apprenticeship course. Results Scores of all the students were increased significantly at the end of the semester, but in terms of the total score of the clinical skills (14.79 ± 1.52 vs. 18.52 ± 0.84), the difference was insignificant (p = 0.29). Conclusion Training clinical skills along with OSCE practice and assessment can improve the nursing students' learning as well as their practical and clinical performance. Improvement of the students' performance can lead to high-quality care nursing.

Retention of student pharmacists' knowledge and skills regarding overdose management with naloxone

Background: Overdose education and naloxone training was recently implemented into the required curriculum of the College of Pharmacy at the University of Rhode Island. The objective of this study was to compare the retention of knowledge between student pharmacists who received a didactic lecture only versus student pharmacists who received the same lecture plus a skills-based objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with a standardized patient actor.Methods: Students in their first-professional year (P1) of the Doctor of Pharmacy program (n = 129) and students in their second-professional (P2) year (n = 123) attended a required lecture on opioid overdose, including detailed naloxone training. P2 students were additionally required to participate in an OSCE assessment following the didactic lecture component. An anonymous, voluntary survey was offered to all students approximately 6 months later. A Chi-Square or Fisher's Exact Test was performed on the survey responses to assess any difference in the responses between the two groups.Results: A total of 99 P1 students (76.7%) and 116 P2 students (94.3%) completed the survey. P1 students were found to be more knowledgeable regarding the duration of naloxone action and identification of risk factors for opioid overdose. P2 students were found to be more knowledgeable regarding non-medical ways patients may obtain opioids and the correct order of emergency response during a suspected opioid overdose…Conclusions: P2 students did not demonstrate superior retention of information regarding naloxone and opioid use disorder on survey questions compared with P1 students. There was a trend towards P2 students feeling more confident in their ability to counsel patients for overdose prevention and reporting disagreement with the statement that “overdose prevention for people who use drugs is a waste of time and money” compared with the P1 students, but these did not reach statistical significance. Since the opioid crisis continues unabated, naloxone training using OSCE and didactic methods remain an on-going required part of the pharmacy curriculum.

Advances in clinical pharmacy education in Germany: a quasi-experimental single-blinded study to evaluate a patient-centred clinical pharmacy course in psychiatry

BackgroundThe pharmacy profession has shifted towards patient-centred care. To meet the new challenges it is necessary to provide students with clinical competencies. A quasi-experimental single-blinded teaching and learning study was carried out using a parallel-group design to evaluate systematically the benefits of clinical teaching in pharmacy education in Germany.MethodsA clinical pharmacy course on a psychiatric ward was developed and implemented for small student groups. The learning aims included: the improvement of patient and interdisciplinary communication skills and the identification and management of pharmaceutical care issues. The control group participated only in the preparation lecture, while the intervention group took part in the complete course. The effects were assessed by an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) and a student satisfaction survey.ResultsThe intervention group achieved significantly better overall results on the OSCE assessment (46.20 ± 10.01 vs. 26.58 ± 12.91 of a maximum of 90 points; p < 0.0001).The practical tasks had the greatest effect, as reflected in the outcomes of tasks 1–5 (34.94 ± 9.60 vs. 18.63 ± 10.24 of a maximum of 60 points; p < 0.0001). Students’ performance on the theoretical tasks (tasks 6–10) was improved but unsatisfying in both groups considering the maximum score (11.50 ± 4.75 vs. 7.50 ± 4.00 of a maximum of 30 points; p < 0.0001). Of the students, 93% rated the course as practice-orientated, and 90% felt better prepared for patient contact. Many students suggested a permanent implementation and an extension of the course.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the developed ward-based course provided learning benefits for clinical skills. Students’ perception of the course was positive. Implementation into the regular clinical pharmacy curriculum is therefore advisable.

Dental students' perception of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): The Taibah University experience, Almadinah Almunawwarah, KSA.

ObjectiveThe Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is an assessment tool used to objectively evaluate clinical competence in medical schools and, more recently, in the nursing profession as well. However, few studies have been conducted to elicit the views of dental students in KSA regarding the OSCE. The present study was designed to explore, evaluate, and analyse students' perceptions of the OSCE and to explore the strengths and weaknesses of this assessment tool as perceived by dental students.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional analytical observational study using a survey design. It took place in the College of Dentistry, Taibah University, KSA. The study sample consisted of third, fourth, and fifth-year students who took the OSCE assessment during their studies.ResultsOf 138 invited students, 119 responded (response rate of 86.2%). Almost half the students (47.1%) agreed that the OSCE exam was fair, while 19.3% agreed that a broad range of clinical skills were included in the OSCE exam. A low percentage of students believed to a great extent that the scores were standardised; however, the practicality and usefulness of the OSCE was questioned. Students perceived that issues pertaining to personality, ethnicity, and gender would not impact the scores.ConclusionThe findings of this study indicated that the OSCE is a meaningful and fair assessment tool for clinical skills.