BACKGROUND: There are many different methods by which trainees may be assessed summatively. AIM: The objective of the study was to determine if videotaped consultations could be used to identify reliably those general practitioner trainees who have not yet reached acceptable levels of competence. METHOD: Videotapes of 10 trainees carrying out normal consultations were assessed by 20 assessors for acceptable competence using a rating scale specifically developed for the purpose. RESULTS: A principal components analysis showed a strong correlation among the items in the rating scale used, indicating that a single underlying factor accounted for 76% of the overall scores. Agreement between assessors on the scoring of individual consultations was limited. There was much greater consistency with regard to the decision on overall competence, examined for the first consultation. A non-competent trainee would have a 95% probability of being identified by the process as described using two assessors for each videotape. The assessors had reached firm judgements on each trainee by the time four consultations had been viewed. CONCLUSION: The workload involved in producing and analysing the tapes is discussed. Considerations of patient consent are addressed. It is concluded that the use of videotaped consultations appears to offer a feasible and reliable method of summative assessment of general practitioner trainees.
BACKGROUND: There are many different methods by which trainees may be assessed summatively. AIM: The objective of the study was to determine if videotaped consultations could be used to identify reliably those general practitioner trainees who have not yet reached acceptable levels of competence. METHOD: Videotapes of 10 trainees carrying out normal consultations were assessed by 20 assessors for acceptable competence using a rating scale specifically developed for the purpose. RESULTS: A principal components analysis showed a strong correlation among the items in the rating scale used, indicating that a single underlying factor accounted for 76% of the overall scores. Agreement between assessors on the scoring of individual consultations was limited. There was much greater consistency with regard to the decision on overall competence, examined for the first consultation. A non-competent trainee would have a 95% probability of being identified by the process as described using two assessors for each videotape. The assessors had reached firm judgements on each trainee by the time four consultations had been viewed. CONCLUSION: The workload involved in producing and analysing the tapes is discussed. Considerations of patient consent are addressed. It is concluded that the use of videotaped consultations appears to offer a feasible and reliable method of summative assessment of general practitioner trainees.