Instruments measuring practitioner performance of the complete examination and screening of neonates: A systematic review.

AIM: The complete examination and screening of the neonate is a recommended assessment of neonatal well-being conducted by appropriately trained medical, midwifery and nursing personnel at specific intervals during the first 6-week post-birth. Our aim was to identify and critically evaluate instruments that measure practitioner performance of this important assessment of neonatal health. METHODS: Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology, a systematic review was undertaken. RESULTS: Four studies were identified as suitable for data extraction and analysis. This paper briefly describes the four instruments, discusses and compares the COSMIN analysis and ratings of each instrument. A recommendation for the instrument identified as the most suitable to measure practitioner performance is provided. CONCLUSION: Most instruments were designed by educators to measure the performance of practitioners developing competence in the complete examination and screening of the neonate. Further development and piloting of instruments designed to measure the performance and continuing competence of qualified practitioners of the newborn examination are required.

Midwifery students' experiences of objective structured clinical examinations: A qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and synthesise the evidence of midwifery students' views and experiences of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). DESIGN: A qualitative evidence synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden's synthesis methods and reported according to the ENTEREQ guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMED, CINAHL Plus, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index (via Web of Science) and Scopus were searched from inception to 19th February 2020 and an updated search was performed on 12th May 2021 to identify qualitative and mixed method studies, reporting qualitative data of undergraduate midwifery students' views and experiences of OSCEs. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were independently screened by title and abstract according to a predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full text review was then conducted independently by two authors. Studies providing qualitative data on undergraduate midwifery students' views and experiences of OSCEs during their midwifery registration education programmes were included. Quality appraisal was performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool. Data synthesis was performed using Thomas and Harden's thematic synthesis method. RESULTS: Eleven studies were identified and included. Thematic synthesis identified 13 descriptive themes which translated into four analytical themes that represented midwifery students' views and experiences of OSCEs: the preparation phase, the assessment phase, the feedback phase and the translation phase. CONCLUSIONS: This synthesis offers insight into undergraduate midwifery students' views and experiences of OSCEs and how they are experienced across four phases. This is determined to be a useful structure to guide midwifery educators and researchers in their consideration of the student experience of OSCEs in the future. Midwifery students in this synthesis reported high levels of nervousness, anxiety, and stress during the OSCE process. The findings reveal that there are a number of controllable factors impacting on midwifery students' feelings of safety in the assessment environment, and that these should be addressed to maximise the advantages that the OSCE has to offer in terms of learning and preparation for clinical practice.