OBJECTIVE: The authors present a pilot project for the evaluation of clinical skills in urology using a method of evaluation based on observation of real performance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An objective and structured clinical examination (OSCE) applied to urology was developed according to a precise predetermined design: 1) Identification of the objectives to be evaluated. 2) Choice of sampling of clinical situations representative of routine urological practice. 3) Construction, on the basis of these cases, of physician-patient interaction stations and question stations, with, for each case, weighting of objectives, construction of observation grids and writing of instructions for candidates, simulated patients and observers. RESULTS: An OSCE circuit of 10 clinical cases and 16 stations was constructed. The main poles of activity and urological settings were represented. Objective complementary investigations, diagnosis and treatment received the highest weightings. The reliability coefficient, the content validity and the construct validity will be verified on the basis of the overall score obtained by candidate. CONCLUSION: Establishment of the score and the expected results in terms of reliability, validity, and feasibility are discussed. The psychometric qualities of the OSCE have been demonstrated. Although a single instrument is not sufficient, it is currently the measuring tool which most closely approximates ideal evaluation of clinical skills. If the feasibility of this method is confirmed, this pilot project in urology could provide a new approach to evaluation strategies and could participate in the current reflection concerning urology training.
OBJECTIVE: The authors present a pilot project for the evaluation of clinical skills in urology using a method of evaluation based on observation of real performance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An objective and structured clinical examination (OSCE) applied to urology was developed according to a precise predetermined design: 1) Identification of the objectives to be evaluated. 2) Choice of sampling of clinical situations representative of routine urological practice. 3) Construction, on the basis of these cases, of physician-patient interaction stations and question stations, with, for each case, weighting of objectives, construction of observation grids and writing of instructions for candidates, simulated patients and observers. RESULTS: An OSCE circuit of 10 clinical cases and 16 stations was constructed. The main poles of activity and urological settings were represented. Objective complementary investigations, diagnosis and treatment received the highest weightings. The reliability coefficient, the content validity and the construct validity will be verified on the basis of the overall score obtained by candidate. CONCLUSION: Establishment of the score and the expected results in terms of reliability, validity, and feasibility are discussed. The psychometric qualities of the OSCE have been demonstrated. Although a single instrument is not sufficient, it is currently the measuring tool which most closely approximates ideal evaluation of clinical skills. If the feasibility of this method is confirmed, this pilot project in urology could provide a new approach to evaluation strategies and could participate in the current reflection concerning urology training.