Medical students' perception of objective structured clinical examination: a feedback for process improvement.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Medical educators have always been desirous of the best methods for formative and summative evaluation of trainees. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is an approach for student assessment in which aspects of clinical competence are evaluated in a comprehensive, consistent, and structured manner with close attention to the objectivity of the process. Though popular in most medical schools globally, its use in Nigeria medical schools appears limited. OBJECTIVES: This study was conceived to explore students' perception about the acceptability of OSCE process and to provide feedback to be used to improve the assessment technique. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on final-year medical students, who participated in the final MBBS surgery examination in June 2011. A 19-item self-administered structured questionnaire was employed to obtain relevant data on demographics of respondents and questions evaluating the OSCE stations in terms of the quality of instructions and organization, learning opportunities, authenticity and transparency of the process, and usefulness of the OSCE as an assessment instrument compared with other formats. Students' responses were based on a 5-point Likert scales ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The data were analyzed using SPSS, version 15 (SPSS, Inc, Chicago, IL). SETTING: The study took place at the University of Ilorin, College of Health Science. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 187 final-year medical students were enrolled in to the survey. RESULTS: Of 187 eligible students, 151 completed the self-administered questionnaire representing 80.7% response rate. A total of 61 (40.4%) students felt that it was easy to understand written instructions at the OSCE stations. In total, 106 (70.2%) students felt that the time allocated to each station was adequate. A total of 89 (58.9%) students agreed that the OSCE accurately measured their knowledge and skill, and 85 (56.3%) reported that OSCE enhanced their communication skill. Of the respondents, 80 (53%) felt that OSCE caused them to be nervous, and 73 (48.3%) expressed their concern about the interevaluator variability at manned stations. OSCE was perceived to be the second most fair test format by 53 (35.1%) respondents, and 56 (37.1%) also suggested that OSCE needs to be used much more than the other assessment formats. CONCLUSION: The findings in this survey appear reassuring regarding students' perception about the validity, objectivity, comprehensiveness, and overall organization of OSCE in the department of surgery. The need to introduce OSCE early in the surgical curriculum is also underscored. The overall feedback was very useful and will facilitate a critical review of the process.