TITLE:
OSCE Feedback: A Randomized Trial of Effectiveness,Cost-Effectiveness and Student Satisfaction
AUTHORS:
Celia A. Taylor, Kathryn E. Green
KEYWORDS:
Assessment; Medical Students; Objective Structured Clinical Examination; Feedback; Randomized Trial
JOURNAL NAME:
Creative Education,
Vol.4 No.6A,
June
13,
2013
ABSTRACT: Purpose: To develop two new types of clinical feedback
for final year medical students using OSCE mark sheets and to evaluate their
effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and student satisfaction in a randomized
trial. Methods: A randomized trial was conducted with two groups
(Cohort A and B) of students (n = 350) at the
University of Birmingham (UK) participating in a two stage Objective Structured
Clinical Examination (OSCE) (November 2011 and April 2012). Students were
randomly assigned to receive one of three feedback interventions (skills-based,
station-based, or both) after the November OSCE. Multivariate regression
analysis was used to test if feedback intervention was a significant predictor
of April OSCE score, while controlling for November OSCE score. Secondary
outcomes were cost-effectiveness and student satisfaction. Results: Feedback group was
not a significant predictor of April scores for Cohort B. In Cohort A, the station-based group did better than the group who
received both types of feedback (2.8%, 95% CI 0.4% to 5.2%, p = 0.022).
There was no difference between the skills-based and station-based groups. The
cost of providing the station-based feedback was double of that for the skills-based.
Questionnaires were received from 245 students (70%). Students who received
both types of feedback were the most satisfied, followed by those in the
station-based group. Conclusion: There
was no consistent difference in effectiveness across the three trial groups.
Students tended to prefer station-based feedback over skills-based feedback,
but students found elements of the standard feedback more helpful than the
feedback evaluated in this trial.