Diane B Wayne1, John Butter, Elaine R Cohen, William C McGaghie. 1. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Galter 3-150, 251 East Huron Street, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. dwayne@northwestern.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac auscultation is a critical clinical skill for physicians, but minimum performance standards do not exist. METHOD: One hundred third-year medical students from three schools completed a case-based computerized examination that assessed their ability to identify 12 major cardiac findings. Cohort performance was reviewed by a panel of expert judges who provided item-based (Angoff method) and group-based (Hofstee method) judgments on two occasions. Judges' ratings were used to calculate a minimum passing standard (MPS) for cardiac auscultation skills. Interrater reliabilities and test-retest reliability (stability) were calculated. RESULTS: Both methods produced reliable and stable data. Use of the Angoff method yielded a more lenient MPS than the Hofstee method. Two thirds of the students (66%) did not achieve the MPS. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a defensible standard allows for reliable evaluation of cardiac auscultation skills. Further work is needed to improve the performance of this important clinical skill by medical students.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac auscultation is a critical clinical skill for physicians, but minimum performance standards do not exist. METHOD: One hundred third-year medical students from three schools completed a case-based computerized examination that assessed their ability to identify 12 major cardiac findings. Cohort performance was reviewed by a panel of expert judges who provided item-based (Angoff method) and group-based (Hofstee method) judgments on two occasions. Judges' ratings were used to calculate a minimum passing standard (MPS) for cardiac auscultation skills. Interrater reliabilities and test-retest reliability (stability) were calculated. RESULTS: Both methods produced reliable and stable data. Use of the Angoff method yielded a more lenient MPS than the Hofstee method. Two thirds of the students (66%) did not achieve the MPS. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a defensible standard allows for reliable evaluation of cardiac auscultation skills. Further work is needed to improve the performance of this important clinical skill by medical students.
Authors: Brenda S Bray; Megan N Willson; Jennifer D Robinson; Gregory T Matsuura; Catrina R Schwartz; Douglas L Weeks Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Matthew D McEvoy; William R Hand; Cory M Furse; Larry C Field; Carlee A Clark; Vivek K Moitra; Paul J Nietert; Michael F O'Connor; Mark E Nunnally Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: Jesse M Ehrenfeld; Matthew D McEvoy; William R Furman; Dylan Snyder; Warren S Sandberg Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Matthew D McEvoy; Jeremy C Smalley; Paul J Nietert; Larry C Field; Cory M Furse; John W Blenko; Benjamin G Cobb; Jenna L Walters; Allen Pendarvis; Nishita S Dalal; John J Schaefer Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: David H Salzman; Kristin L Rising; Kenzie A Cameron; Rhea E Powell; Dimitri Papanagnou; Amanda Doty; Katherine Piserchia; Lori Latimer; William C McGaghie; Danielle M McCarthy Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-02