Original Article

Medical Student H&Ps: Do You Have to Observe Them All At Once?

Authors: David M. Mills, MD, Michele K. Friesinger, MA, Sherron M. Jackson, MD, Patricia G. McBurney, MD

Abstract

Objectives: Direct observation of medical students’ history and physical examination (H&P) skills by attendings is essential in ensuring trainees’ competence. This study compared whether partial observations by multiple pediatric attendings across various clinical encounters versus a full observation by one attending affected students’ performance on the pediatric Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) and the Year 3 Clinical Performance Examination (CPX3).

Methods: For the 2013–2014 and 2014–2015 academic years, 323 medical students submitted either H&P checklists completed by one attending observing an entire H&P (full observations) versus multiple attendings observing portions of the H&P (partial observations). The full and partial observation groups were compared by their pediatric OSCE and CPX3 performance.

Results: Students submitting full observations (n = 185) versus partial observations (n = 138) revealed no difference in OSCE (3.10 vs 3.10, P = 0.98) or CPX3 scores (74.49 vs 75.31, P = 0.18). Students submitting checklists by clerkship midpoint performed better on the OSCE (3.11 vs 2.88, P = 0.001) and CPX3 (75.00 vs 72.25, P = 0.03).

Conclusions: Partial versus full observations of students’ H&P skills have no effect on standardized clinical examination performance, and clerkships should consider using partial observations of students for efficient assessments. Promptness of checklist submission also may be an indicator of examination performance.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first.

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view your purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($15)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Liaison Committee on Medical Education. LCME functions andstructure of a medical school. Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the MD degree. Standard 9.4. http://www.lcme.org/publications. Published March 2018. Accessed December 7, 2016.
 
2. Carraccio C, Englander R. The objective structured clinical examination: a step in the direction of competency-based evaluation. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000;154:736-741.
 
3. Turner JL, Dankoski ME. Objective structured clinical exams: a critical review. Fam Med 2008;40:574-578.
 
4. Hodges B, Turnbull J, Cohen R, et al. Evaluating communication skills in the OSCE format: reliability and generalizability. Med Educ 1996;30:38-43.
 
5. Verma M, Singh T. Communication skills in clinical practice fad or necessity? Indian Pediatr 1994;31:237-238.
 
6. Setyonugroho W, Kennedy KM, Kropmans TJ. Reliability and validity of OSCE checklists used to assess the communication skills of undergraduate medical students: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2015; pii: S0738-3991(15)00277-3.
 
7. Comert M, Zill JM, Christalle E, et al. Assessing communication skills of medical students in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE)-a systematic review of rating scales. PLoS One 2016;11:e0152717.
 
8. Harasym PH, Woloschuk W, Cunning L. Undesired variance due to examiner stringency/leniency effect in communication skill scores assessed in OSCEs. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2008;13:617-632.
 
9. Van Nuland M, Van den Noortgate W, van der Vleuten C, et al. Optimizing the utility of communication OSCEs: omit station-specific checklists and provide students with narrative feedback. Patient Educ Couns 2012;88:106-112.
 
10. Gupta P, Dewan P, Singh T. Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) revisited. Indian Pediatr 2010;47:911-920.
 
11. Kemahli S. Clinical teaching and OSCE in pediatrics. Med Educ Online 2001;6:4531.
 
12. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME program requirements for graduate medical education in pediatrics. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/320_pediatrics_2017-07-01.pdf. Accessed October 6, 2018.
 
13. Worzala K, Rattner SL, Boulet JR, et al. Evaluation of the congruence between students' postencounter notes and standardized patients' checklists in a clinical skills examination. Teach Learn Med 2008;20:31-36.
 
14. Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review. JAMA 2009;302:1316-1326.
 
15. Fromme HB, Karani R, Downing SM. Direct observation in medical education: a review of the literature and evidence for validity. Mt Sinai J Med 2009;76:365-371.
 
16. Singh T, Kundra S, Gupta P. Direct observation and focused feedback for clinical skills training. Indian Pediatr 2014;51:713-717.
 
17. Duffy FD, Gordon GH, Whelan G, et al. Assessing competence in communication and interpersonal skills: the Kalamazoo II report. Acad Med 2004;79:495-507.
 
18. Kim S, Willett LR, Noveck H, et al. Implementation of a mini-CEX requirement across all third-year clerkships. Teach Learn Med 2016;28:424-431.
 
19. Daelmans HE, Mak-van der Vossen MC, Croiset G, et al. What difficulties do faculty members face when conducting workplace-based assessments in undergraduate clerkships? Int J Med Educ 2016;7:19-24.
 
20. Kogan JR, Bellini LM, Shea JA. Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mCEX) in a medicine core clerkship. Acad Med 2003;78(suppl 10):S33-S35.
 
21. Al Ansari A, Ali SK, Donnon T. The construct and criterion validity of the mini-CEX: a meta-analysis of the published research. Acad Med 2013;88:413-420.
 
22. Schiller J, Hammoud M, Belmonte D, et al. Systematic direct observation of clinical skills in the clinical year. https://www.mededportal.org/publication/9712. Published February 13, 2014. Accessed September 25, 2018.
 
23. Ozuah PO, Reznik M, Greenberg L. Improving medical student feedback with a clinical encounter card. Ambul Pediatr 2007;7:449-452.
 
24. Kogan JR, Shea JA. Implementing feedback cards in core clerkships. Med Educ 2008;42:1071-1079.
 
25. Paukert JL, Richards ML, Olney C. An encounter card system for increasing feedback to students. Am J Surg 2002;183:300-304.
 
26. Lamba S, Nagurka R. Tool for documenting clinical point-of-care direct observation and formative feedback. https://www.mededportal.org/publication/10093. Published July 21, 2015. Accessed September 25, 2018.
 
27. Pierce JR, Jr Noronha L, Collins NP, et al. Brief structured observation of medical student hospital visits. Educ Health (Abingdon) 2013;26:188-191.
 
28. Holmboe ES. Faculty and the observation of trainees' clinical skills: problems and opportunities. Acad Med 2004;79:16-22.
 
29. Levy BT, Gjerde CL, Albrecht LA. The effects of precepting on and the support desired by community-based preceptors in Iowa. Acad Med 1997;72:382-384.
 
30. Hauer KE, Holmboe ES, Kogan JR. Twelve tips for implementing tools for direct observation of medical trainees' clinical skills during patient encounters. Med Teach 2011;33:27-33.
 
31. Lane JL, Gottlieb RP. Structured clinical observations: a method to teach clinical skills with limited time and financial resources. Pediatrics 2000;105(4 Pt 2):973-977.
 
32. Bickley LS, , ed. Bates’ Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
 
33. Hamburger EK, Cuzzi S, Coddington DA, et al. Observation of resident clinical skills: outcomes of a program of direct observation in the continuity clinic setting. Acad Pediatr 2011;11:394-402.
 
34. Dattner L, Lopreiato JO. Introduction of a direct observation program into a pediatric resident continuity clinic: feasibility, acceptability, and effect on resident feedback. Teach Learn Med 2010;22:280-286.
 
35. Hasnain M, Connell KJ, Downing SM, et al. Toward meaningful evaluation of clinical competence: the role of direct observation in clerkship ratings. Acad Med 2004;79(suppl 10):S21-S24.
 
36. Hanson JL, Bannister SL, Clark A, et al. Oh, what you can see: the role of observation in medical student education. Pediatrics 2010;126:843-845.