Team Objective Structured Bedside Assessment (TOSBA) as formative assessment in undergraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology: a cohort study

BMC Medical Education

Deirdre J. Murphy¹  Pauline Joyce²  Richard P. Deane² 

[1] Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Trinity College, University of Dublin, Coombe Women & Infants University Hospital, Dublin 8, Dublin, Republic of Ireland;School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephen’s Green, Dublin 2, Dublin, Republic of Ireland

关键词: Academic performance;    gynaecology;    Obstetrics &;    Reasoning;    Clinical skills;    Formative assessment;    Team objective structured bedside assessment;   

Others  :  1228667
DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0456-5

 received in 2015-04-05, accepted in 2015-09-30,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Team Objective Structured Bedside Assessment (TOSBA) is a learning approach in which a team of medical students undertake a set of structured clinical tasks with real patients in order to reach a diagnosis and formulate a management plan and receive immediate feedback on their performance from a facilitator. TOSBA was introduced as formative assessment to an 8-week undergraduate teaching programme in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (O&G) in 2013/14. Each student completed 5 TOSBA sessions during the rotation. The aim of the study was to evaluate TOSBA as a teaching method to provide formative assessment for medical students during their clinical rotation. The research questions were: Does TOSBA improve clinical, communication and/or reasoning skills? Does TOSBA provide quality feedback?

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted over a full academic year (2013/14). The study used 2 methods to evaluate TOSBA as a teaching method to provide formative assessment: (1) an online survey of TOSBA at the end of the rotation and (2) a comparison of the student performance in TOSBA with their performance in the final summative examination.

Results

During the 2013/14 academic year, 157 students completed the O&G programme and the final summative examination . Each student completed the required 5 TOSBA tasks. The response rate to the student survey was 68 % (n = 107/157). Students reported that TOSBA was a beneficial learning experience with a positive impact on clinical, communication and reasoning skills. Students rated the quality of feedback provided by TOSBA as high. Students identified the observation of the performance and feedback of other students within their TOSBA team as key features. High achieving students performed well in both TOSBA and summative assessments. The majority of students who performed poorly in TOSBA subsequently passed the summative assessments (n = 20/21, 95 %). Conversely, the majority of students who failed the summative assessments had satisfactory scores in TOSBA (n = 6/7, 86 %).

Conclusions

TOSBA has a positive impact on the clinical, communication and reasoning skills of medical students through the provision of high-quality feedback. The use of structured pre-defined tasks, the observation of the performance and feedback of other students and the use of real patients are key elements of TOSBA. Avoiding student complacency and providing accurate feedback from TOSBA are on-going challenges.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Deane et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Epstein RM. Assessment in medical education. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(4):387-96.
• [2]Brookhart S, Moss C, Long B. Promoting student ownership of learning through high-impact formative assessment practices. J Multidiscip Eval. 2009; 6(12):52-67.
• [3]Al-Kadri HM, Al-Moamary MS, Roberts C, Van der vleuten CPM. Exploring assessment factors contributing to students’ study strategies: Literature review. Med Teach. 2012;34(s1):S42–50.
• [4]Rushton A. Formative assessment: a key to deep learning? Med Teach. 2005; 27(6):509-13.
• [5]Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review. JAMA. 2009; 302(12):1316.
• [6]Spencer J. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Learning and teaching in the clinical environment. BMJ. 2003; 326(7389):591.
• [7]Miller SDW, Butler MW, Meagher F, Costello RW, McElvaney NG. Team Objective Structured Bedside Assessment (TOSBA): a novel and feasible way of providing formative teaching and assessment. Med Teach. 2007; 29(2–3):156-9.
• [8]Meagher FM, Butler MW, Miller SD, Costello RW, Conroy RM, McElvaney NG. Predictive validity of measurements of clinical competence using the Team Objective Structured Bedside Assessment (TOSBA): assessing the clinical competence of final year medical students. Med Teach. 2009; 31(11):545-50.
• [9]Rolfe I, McPherson J. Formative assessment: how am I doing? Lancet. 1995; 345(8953):837-9.
• [10]Cantillon P, Sargeant J. Giving feedback in clinical settings. BMJ. 2008; 337:a1961.
• [11]Elstein AS. Evidence base of clinical diagnosis: clinical problem solving and diagnostic decision making: selective review of the cognitive literature. BMJ. 2002; 324(7339):729-32.
• [12]Hill F, Kendall K, Galbraith K, Crossley J. Implementing the undergraduate mini-CEX: a tailored approach at Southampton University. Med Educ. 2009; 43(4):326-34.
• [13]Burch VC, Seggie JL, Gary NE. Formative assessment promotes learning in undergraduate clinical clerkships. South Afr Med J. 2006; 96(5):430-3.
• [14]Haffling AC, Beckman A, Edgren G. Structured feedback to undergraduate medical students: 3 years’ experience of an assessment tool. Med Teach. 2011; 33(7):e349-57.
• [15]Maudsley G, Strivens J. Promoting professional knowledge, experiential learning and critical thinking for medical students. Med Educ. 2000; 34(7):535-44.
• [16]Cleland J, Leggett H, Sandars J, Costa MJ, Patel R, Moffat M. The remediation challenge: theoretical and methodological insights from a systematic review: the challenge of remediation. Med Educ. 2013; 47(3):242-51.
• [17]Bienstock JL, Katz NT, Cox SM, Hueppchen N, Erickson S, Puscheck EE. To the point: medical education reviews—providing feedback. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 196(6):508-13.
• [18]Yardley S, Teunissen PW, Dornan T. Experiential learning: AMEE guide No. 63. Med Teach. 2012; 34(2):e102-15.
• [19]Norcini JJ, McKinley DW. Assessment methods in medical education. Teach Educ. 2007; 23(3):239-50.
• [20]Boud D. Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education [Internet]. Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Sydney; 2010. Available from: http://www. uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/Assessment-2020_propositions_final.pdf
• [21]Cantillon P, Dornan T. Who needs beds? Perspect Med Educ. 2014; 3(5):399-400.