OBJECTIVE: To assess the experience on using direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) by trainees and trainers and to evaluate its use during the training process of Otorhinolaryngology (ORL) residency. METHODS: This study was designed as a prospective educational research. For the quantitative assessment, the "construct validity" of the assessment tool was examined. For the qualitative assessment, the trainees and trainers' experiences regarding the use of DOPS in training process were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 55 DOPS assessment forms were filled during the study. The mean observation time was 7.14±4.83 (range: 1-20) minutes, and the mean feedback time was 2.11±2.01 (range: 0.5-10) minutes. A significant difference was detected between the first year trainees and the older ones, whereas no significant difference was observed between the third, fourth, and fifth year trainees. A statistically significant, positive correlation was found between the years of education and the average score. According to the results of the qualitative assessment, the trainees stated that they realized their technical inadequacy in some procedures and it helped them to improve their skills during their residency training. The trainers confirmed that they gave feedback after each assessment. Both the trainers and trainees suggested that specific guidelines should be prepared for every procedure. CONCLUSION: DOPS is a useful, valid, and fair tool for assessing Otorhinolaryngology trainees. The data obtained from the DOPS forms can be used for demonstrating the success of a training clinic and to evaluate the training program.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the experience on using direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) by trainees and trainers and to evaluate its use during the training process of Otorhinolaryngology (ORL) residency. METHODS: This study was designed as a prospective educational research. For the quantitative assessment, the "construct validity" of the assessment tool was examined. For the qualitative assessment, the trainees and trainers' experiences regarding the use of DOPS in training process were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 55 DOPS assessment forms were filled during the study. The mean observation time was 7.14±4.83 (range: 1-20) minutes, and the mean feedback time was 2.11±2.01 (range: 0.5-10) minutes. A significant difference was detected between the first year trainees and the older ones, whereas no significant difference was observed between the third, fourth, and fifth year trainees. A statistically significant, positive correlation was found between the years of education and the average score. According to the results of the qualitative assessment, the trainees stated that they realized their technical inadequacy in some procedures and it helped them to improve their skills during their residency training. The trainers confirmed that they gave feedback after each assessment. Both the trainers and trainees suggested that specific guidelines should be prepared for every procedure. CONCLUSION: DOPS is a useful, valid, and fair tool for assessing Otorhinolaryngology trainees. The data obtained from the DOPS forms can be used for demonstrating the success of a training clinic and to evaluate the training program.
Entities:
Keywords:
Direct observation of procedural skills; feedback; residency training; supervised learning events; workplace-based assessment
Authors: Aileen Barrett; Rose Galvin; Yvonne Steinert; Albert Scherpbier; Ann O'Shaughnessy; Gillian Walsh; Mary Horgan Journal: Springerplus Date: 2016-02-20