Incorporating patient partner scores into high stakes assessment: an observational study into opinions and attitudes.

BACKGROUND: Volunteer patients (also known as patient partners (PPs)) play a vital role in undergraduate healthcare curricula. They frequently take part in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) and rate aspects of students' performance. However, the inclusion and weighting of PP marks varies, while attitudes and opinions regarding how (and if) they should contribute towards the pass/fail outcome are uncertain. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted to explore beliefs of PPs regarding inclusion of their scores in a high stakes undergraduate OSCE in a single UK medical school. All PPs delivering components of the local MBChB curriculum were asked to participate in the questionnaire study. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and framework analysis respectively. RESULTS: Fifty out of 160 (31% response rate) PPs completed the questionnaire; 70% had participated in a final year OSCE. Thirty (60%) felt their marks should be incorporated into a student's overall score, while 28% were uncertain. The main reasons for inclusion were recognition of the patient perspective (31%) and their ability to assess attitudes and professionalism (27%), while reasons against inclusion included lack of PP qualification/training (18%) and concerns relating to consistency (14%). The majority of PPs were uncertain what proportion of the total mark they should contribute, although many felt that 5-10% of the total score was reasonable. Most respondents (70%) felt that globally low PP scores should not result in an automatic fail and many (62%) acknowledged that prior to mark inclusion, further training was required. CONCLUSION: These data show that most respondents considered it reasonable to "formalise their expertise" by contributing marks in the overall assessment of students in a high stakes OSCE, although what proportion they believe this should represent was variable. Some expressed concerns that using marks towards progress decisions may alter PP response patterns. It would therefore seem reasonable to compare outcomes (i.e. pass/fail status) using historical data both incorporating and not incorporating PP marks to evaluate the effects of doing so. Further attention to existing PP training programmes is also required in order to provide clear instruction on how to globally rate students to ensure validity and consistency.

Sequential testing in a high stakes OSCE: Determining number of screening tests.

OBJECTIVE: The sequential objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) is a stand-alone variation of the traditional OSCE whereby all students sit a screening test. Those who pass this initial assessment undergo no further testing while weakly performing students sit an additional (sequential) test to determine their overall pass/fail status. Our aim was to determine outcomes of adopting a sequential OSCE approach using different numbers of screening stations and pass marks. METHOD: We carried out a retrospective, observational study of anonymised databases of two cohorts of student outcomes from the final OSCE examination at the University of Aberdeen Medical School. Data were accessed for students (n = 388) who sat the exam in the years 2013-2014. We used Stata simulate program to compare outcomes - in terms of sensitivity and specificity - across 5000 random selections of 6-14 OSCE stations using random selections of groups of 100 students (with different screening test pass marks) versus those obtained across 15 stations. RESULTS: Across 6-14 stations, the sensitivity was ≥87% in 2013 and ≥84% in 2014 while the specificity ranged from 60% to 100% in both years. Specificity generally increased as the number of screening stations increased (with concomitant narrowing of the 95% confidence interval), while sensitivity varied between 84 and 98%. Similar sensitivities and specificities were found with screening pass marks of +1, +2 and +3 standard errors of measurement (SEM). Eight stations as a screening test appeared to be a reasonable compromise in terms of high sensitivity (88-89%) and specificity (83-86%). CONCLUSION: This research extends current sequential OSCE literature using a novel and robust approach to identify the "ideal" in terms of number of screening stations and pass mark. We discuss the educational and resource implications of our findings and make recommendations for the use of the sequential OSCE in medical education.

Phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a new approach to oral treatment.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease represents a major global health care burden for both primary and secondary care providers and is the most common respiratory condition necessitating hospital admission. Short-acting bronchodilators play a vital role in immediate relief of symptoms, while inhaled long-acting bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids are advocated for regular use in individuals with persistent symptoms and exacerbations. Theophylline is a nonspecific phosphodiesterase inhibitor and is usually reserved for patients with ongoing symptoms despite optimum inhaled bronchodilator treatment or when difficulty is encountered with inhaler devices. However, it is often not widely used mainly due to frequency of dose-related adverse effects, numerous drug interactions and narrow therapeutic index. This in turn has lead to the development of more selective phosphodiesterase inhibitors in an attempt to create a drug which patients can use with beneficial effects but without the problems associated with theophylline. Current data do indicate that phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors confer some benefits in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease when compared to placebo in terms of lung function, quality of life and exacerbations. They are also generally well tolerated. Further studies are required to determine fully their long-term beneficial and adverse effect profiles and ultimately where they might comfortably sit in management algorithms.

Pneumothorax: an update.

Pneumothorax is a relatively common clinical problem which can occur in individuals of any age. Irrespective of aetiology (primary, or secondary to antecedent lung disorders or injury), immediate management depends on the extent of cardiorespiratory impairment, degree of symptoms and size of pneumothorax. Guidelines have been produced which outline appropriate strategies in the care of patients with a pneumothorax, while the emergence of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery has created a more accessible and successful tool by which to prevent recurrence in selected individuals. This evidence based review highlights current practices involved in the management of patients with a pneumothorax.

Indacaterol Novartis/skyePharma.

In collaboration with SkyePharma, Novartis is developing a multidose dry powder inhaler formulation of indacaterol, a long-acting beta2 agonist and bronchodilator, for the potential treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In January 2006, Novartis expected phase III clinical trials to start in early 2006, with submission planned for 2007.

Long-acting beta2-agonists in asthma: not so SMART?

Asthma is a worldwide chronic disorder that is characterised by airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness, which results in intermittent airflow obstruction and subsequent perception of symptoms and exacerbations. Inhaled corticosteroids are a fundamental component in the prevention of the short- and long-term complications associated with inadequately controlled asthma. However, many individuals experience persistent symptoms and exacerbations despite receiving low-to-medium doses of an inhaled corticosteroid (400-800 microg/day of beclometasone or equivalent). In these symptomatic asthmatic patients, guidelines advocate the initiation of a long-acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) as additional second-line controller therapy. The recent SMART (Salmeterol Multi-centre Asthma Research Trial) study was designed to compare the effects of add-on salmeterol 42 microg (ex-actuator) twice daily with placebo over 28 weeks in a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group fashion, with the intention to enrol 60,000 asthmatic patients. However, the study was halted prematurely because preliminary data revealed an increased mortality associated with regular use of salmeterol. Moreover, concerning rates of respiratory-related deaths, asthma-related deaths and life-threatening events were observed among African Americans, who constituted up to 18% of the study population. This in turn prompted the US FDA to announce important safety information regarding inhalers containing LABAs and advise that new labelling be produced outlining the "small but significant risk in asthma-related deaths" associated with their regular use. This evidence-based review discusses the data from SMART and highlights potentially important drawbacks with regular use of LABAs in persistent asthma.