Independent and mentored video review of OSCEs

We examined student perceptions of the process, helpful elements of each type of review and perceived impact after a follow‐up OSCE. ResultsThe mentored group (n = 12) was more comfortable watching themselves than the independent group (n = 11); using a five‐point Likert scale, where 1 indicates ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 indicates ‘strongly agree’: 3.5 ± 1.2 (I) versus 4.5 ± 0.2 (M) (p = 0.02). The mentored group more strongly agreed that their clinical skills would improve: 3.6 ± 1.1 (I) versus 4.9 ± 0.2 (M) (p < 0.01). After the follow‐up OSCE, the mentored group (n = 10) tended to feel more strongly that their clinical skills had improved compared with the independent group (n = 9): 3.6 ± 1.3 (I) versus 4.3 ± 0.7 (M) (p = 0.14). DiscussionThis pilot study demonstrates the utility of using a structured framework for post‐OSCE video review, both for the assessment of performance and for the development of a behavioural action plan. There are advantages to using a mentor‐guided model, but further study is needed to determine whether actual OSCE performances improve as a consequence.Video review of OSCE performance allows students to analyse their performance
Source: The Clinical Teacher - Category: Universities & Medical Training Authors: Tags: Original Article Source Type: research