OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the development, validity, and reliability of 2 undergraduate Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) stations for core hand and knee examination skills. METHODS: Two OSCE stations for hand and knee based on core skills were developed, and qualitatively assessed for face and content validity by an expert consensus panel. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the performance of third- (n = 21) and fifth-year (n = 50) medical students with 6 specialist registrars (SpR) in rheumatology. Concurrent validity was evaluated by correlating the scores of the fifth-year students with their eventual final examination scores. The fifth-year data were used to calculate the interrater and intrarater reliabilities of 2 examiners. Intrarater reliability analyzed repeat scores using videotapes of the examinations. RESULTS: Both stations were deemed to fulfil face and content validity criteria by the expert consensus panel. There was no significant difference in the mean scores of the third- and fifth-years. There were significant differences in the mean scores between both student groups and the SpR in both stations consistent with a valid construct theory. The fifth-year hand OSCE results correlated moderately with other indices of clinical skills, but not knowledge, and satisfied concurrent validity. Inter- and intrarater reliability for both stations was high. CONCLUSION: These OSCE stations are valid and reliable tools for testing competency in core hand and knee examination skills. They can be used in educational research as outcome measures of specific teaching interventions and can also be used as an early feedback tool when teaching joint examination.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the development, validity, and reliability of 2 undergraduate Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) stations for core hand and knee examination skills. METHODS: Two OSCE stations for hand and knee based on core skills were developed, and qualitatively assessed for face and content validity by an expert consensus panel. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the performance of third- (n = 21) and fifth-year (n = 50) medical students with 6 specialist registrars (SpR) in rheumatology. Concurrent validity was evaluated by correlating the scores of the fifth-year students with their eventual final examination scores. The fifth-year data were used to calculate the interrater and intrarater reliabilities of 2 examiners. Intrarater reliability analyzed repeat scores using videotapes of the examinations. RESULTS: Both stations were deemed to fulfil face and content validity criteria by the expert consensus panel. There was no significant difference in the mean scores of the third- and fifth-years. There were significant differences in the mean scores between both student groups and the SpR in both stations consistent with a valid construct theory. The fifth-year hand OSCE results correlated moderately with other indices of clinical skills, but not knowledge, and satisfied concurrent validity. Inter- and intrarater reliability for both stations was high. CONCLUSION: These OSCE stations are valid and reliable tools for testing competency in core hand and knee examination skills. They can be used in educational research as outcome measures of specific teaching interventions and can also be used as an early feedback tool when teaching joint examination.
Authors: R Brent Stansfield; Lisa Diponio; Cliff Craig; John Zeller; Edmund Chadd; Joshua Miller; Seetha Monrad Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 2.463