Power of the policy: how the announcement of high-stakes clinical examination altered OSCE implementation at institutional level

BMC Medical Education

Keh-Min Liu¹  Der-Fang Chen³  Cheuk-Kwan Sun²  Tsuen-Chiuan Tsai⁴  Chi-Wei Lin⁵ 

[1] Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, No. 100, Shih-Chuan 1st Road, Kaohsiung City, 80708, Taiwan;Department of Medical Education, E-Da hospital, I-Shou University, No.1, Yida Road, Yanchao Dist, Kaohsiung City, 82445, Taiwan;Fu-Jen Catholic University College of Medicine, No.510, Zhongzheng Rd., Xinzhuang Dist, New Taipei City, Taiwan;Department of Chinese Medicine, I-Shou University, No.1, Yida Road, Yanchao Dist, Kaohsiung City 82445, Taiwan;Graduate Institute of Adult Education, National Kaohsiung Normal University, No.116, Heping 1st Rd., Lingya Dist, Kaohsiung City, 80201, Taiwan

关键词: High-stakes;    Policy;    Assessment;    OSCE;   

Others  :  1139055
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-13-8

 received in 2012-10-05, accepted in 2013-01-21,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has been widely applied as a high-stakes examination for assessing physicians’ clinical competency. In 1992, OSCE was first introduced in Taiwan, and the authorities announced that passing the OSCE would be a prerequisite for step-2 medical licensure examination in 2013. This study aimed to investigate the impacts of the announced national OSCE policy on implementation of OSCE at the institutional level. Further, the readiness and the recognition of barriers toward a high-stakes examination were explored.

Methods

In 2007 and 2010, the year before and after the announcement of high-stakes OSCE policy in 2008, respectively, questionnaires on the status of OSCE implementation were distributed to all hospitals with active OSCE programs in Taiwan. Information on OSCE facilities, equipment, station length, number of administrations per year, and the recognition of barriers to the success of implementing an OSCE were collected. The missing data were completed by telephone interviews. The OSCE format, administration, and facilities before and after the announcement of the nationwide OSCE policy were compared.

Results

The data were collected from 17 hospitals in 2007 and 21 in 2010. Comparing the OSCE formats between 2007 and 2010, the number of stations increased and the station length decreased. The designated space and the equipment for OSCE were also found to have been improved. As for the awareness of OSCE implementation barriers, the hospital representatives concerned mostly about the availability and quality of standardized patients in 2007, as well as space and facilities in 2010.

Conclusions

The results of this study underscored an overall increase in the number of OSCE hospitals and changes in facilities and formats. While recruitment and training of standardized patients were the major concerns before the official disclosure of the policy, space and facilities became the focus of attention after the announcement. The study results highlighted the influence of government policy on different aspects of OSCE implementation in Taiwanese training institutes that showed high level of support as reflected in the improved hardware and the change in OSCE format to serve the summative purpose.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Lin et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Harden RM, Stevenson M, Downie WW, Wilson GM: Assessment of clinical competence using objective structured examination. Br Med J 1975, 1(5955):447-451.
• [2]Reznick RK, Blackmore D, Dauphinee WD, Rothman AI, Smee S: Large-scale high-stakes testing with an OSCE: report from the Medical Council of Canada. Acad Med 1996, 71(1 Suppl):S19-21.
• [3]Whelan GP, Boulet JR, McKinley DW, Norcini JJ, van Zanten M, Hambleton RK, Burdick WP, Peitzman SJ: Scoring standardized patient examinations: lessons learned from the development and administration of the ECFMG Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA®). Medical teacher 2005, 27(3):200-206.
• [4]Kim KS: Introduction and administration of the clinical skill test of the medical licensing examination, republic of Korea (2009). J Educ Eval Health Prof 2010, 7:4.
• [5]Lee Y-S: Osce for the Medical Licensing Examination in Korea. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2008, 24(12):646-650.
• [6]Lee K-T, Liu W-T, Yen J-H, Liu C-K, Liu K-M, Lai C-S: The Experience of an Objective, Structured Clinical Examination at Kaohsiung Medical University. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2008, 24(12):624-626.
• [7]Liu M, Huang YS, Liu KM: Assessing core clinical competencies required of medical graduates in Taiwan. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2006, 22(10):475-483.
• [8]Sibert L, Mairesse J-P, Aulanier S, Olombel P, Becret F, Thiberville J, Peron J-M, Doucet J, Weber J: Introducing the objective structured clinical examination to a general practice residency programme: results of a French pilot study. Medical teacher 2001, 23(4):383-388.
• [9]Davis MH: OSCE: the Dundee experience. Medical teacher 2003, 25(3):255-261.
• [10]Vargas AL, Boulet JR, Errichetti A, Zanten M, López MJ, Reta AM: Developing performance-based medical school assessment programs in resource-limited environments. Medical teacher 2007, 29(2-3):192-198.
• [11]Roberts J, Norman G: Reliability and learning from the objective structured clinical examination. Med Educ 1990, 24(3):219-223.
• [12]Newble D: Techniques for measuring clinical competence: objective structured clinical examinations. Medical Education 2004, 38(2):199-203.
• [13]Roberts C, Newble D, Jolly B, Reed M, Hampton K: Assuring the quality of high-stakes undergraduate assessments of clinical competence. Medical teacher 2006, 28(6):535-543.
• [14]Hodges B: Validity and the OSCE. Medical teacher 2003, 25(3):250-254.
• [15]Vallevand A, Violato C: A predictive and construct validity study of a high-stakes objective clinical examination for assessing the clinical competence of International Medical Graduates. Teach Learn Med 2012, 24(2):168-176.
• [16]Norcini J, Boulet J: Methodological issues in the use of standardized patients for assessment. Teach Learn Med 2003, 15(4):293-297.
• [17]Newble DI, Swanson DB: Psychometric characteristics of the objective structured clinical examination. Medical Education 1988, 22(4):325-334.
• [18]Brannick MT, Erol-Korkmaz HT, Prewett M: A systematic review of the reliability of objective structured clinical examination scores. Medical Education 2011, 45(12):1181-1189.