Cargando…

Standard-Setting of Multidisciplinary Objective Structured Practical Examination

Purpose The present work applies the standard-setting in the multidisciplinary Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE) of the MusculoSkeletal and Integument systems (MSK) module using Modified Ebel’s method to differentiate the competent students from the non-competent ones. Materials and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zaki, Sherif M, Ismail, Amira S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9225060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35755509
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.25296
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose The present work applies the standard-setting in the multidisciplinary Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE) of the MusculoSkeletal and Integument systems (MSK) module using Modified Ebel’s method to differentiate the competent students from the non-competent ones. Materials and methods One hundred fifty-six students participated in the multidisciplinary OSPE. The MSK-OSPE consists of mid-module and final. According to the blueprint of the OSPE, the mid-module OSPE tested the knowledge and skills of the upper limb, and the final OSPE verified the knowledge and skills of the lower limb. Modified Ebel’s method was used to identify the Minimum Pass Level (MPL) in each station and the whole exam accordingly. Results Fifty-seven percent (57%) of the students passed both exams, while 25.6% did not pass the mid-module exam and 31.4% did not pass the final exam, 17.9% did not pass both exams and 25% did not pass one exam. The MPL for most of the stations in both exams using modified Ebel’s method of the standard-setting was more than 50% which is the conventional pass mark. However, the MPL for stations 4, and 6 in the mid-module exam (ulna and arteries of the upper limb) and stations 7, 9, and 14 (muscles of the lower limb, anatomy of ankle joint, physiology of nerve) was < 50%. While the total pass mark of the mid-module OSPE was 66% and the pass mark for the final OSPE was 60% Conclusion The minimal pass level (MPL) in mid module and final OSPE were 66% and 60% respectively which are more than the conventional cut off point (50%) that indicating that the standard-setting was effective in identifying poor performers who cannot be identified by the conventional method that led to enhance the quality of OSPE as an assessment tool. Moreover, students developed the skills to deal with standardized patients in clinical stations. However, some defects and areas of improvement were identified in some physiological and anatomical stations. The organizing committee recommended identifying the poor performers and conducting extra-tutorial sessions on the defective topics.