Pharmacy Student Perceptions and Feedback on the Modified Objective Structured Clinical Examination

Authors

  • Muhannad R M Salih Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Mohd Baidi Bahari Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Syed Azhar Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Syed Sulaimam Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Azmi Sarriff Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Sarmed N Yaseen Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia
  • Yelly Oktavia Sari Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia

Keywords:

Objective Structured Clinical Examination, CCTV, Pharmacy Curriculum, Clinical Competence, Perception

Abstract

Aim:To assess pharmacy students’ perceptions and acceptance of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) at the School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia.Method: A cross-sectional survey using a 32-item questionnaire was distributed to four groups of third-year pharmacy students. Two of the groups (group A) received and completed the questionnaire immediately after the exam, while the remaining two groups (group B) received and completed the questionnaire one week after the exam. This questionnaire allowed students to evaluate the structure and organisation of the OSCE, state their perceptions of the validity and reliability of the OSCE, and rate the OSCE in relation to other evaluation tools. Open-ended questions were also administered to the students to elicit written feedback about the positive and negative aspects of the examination as well as suggestions for its improvement.Results:A significant difference was observed between students in groups A and B (74.3% versus 32.4%) with regard to views of the OSCE as comprehensive and covering a wide range of knowledge (Pearson Chi-square P=0.001). Sixty-five percent of students in group A felt that the exam encompassed a broad range of clinical skills.A substantial percentage of both groups A and B (57.1% and 40.5%, respectively) believed that the OSCE was an intimidating method of assessment. A considerable proportion of students in groups A (60%) and B (48.6%) agreed that the time allotment of 5 minutes per work station was insufficient to complete the task in question. Three-quarters to two-thirds of students (A, 77.1%; B, 64.9%) found the OSCE to be a useful method for learning real-life scenarios in clinical pharmacy.Conclusion:In general, OSCE was accepted by a majority of the students. Students’ perceptions and feedback have necessitated the modification of the current OSCE to improve the effectiveness of this assessment method.

References

Allen, R., Heard, J., Savidge, M., Bittergle, J., Cantrell, M., & Huffmaster, T. (1998). Surveying students' attitudes during the OSCE. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 3, 197-206.

Austin, Z., Gregory, P., & Tabak, D. (2006). Simulated patients vs. standardized patients in objective structured clinical examinations. Am J Pharm Educ, 70, 119.

Awaisu, A., Mohamed, M. H. N., & Al-Efan, Q. A. M. (2007). Perception of pharmacy students in Malaysia on the use of objective structured clinical examinations to evaluate competence. Am J Pharm Educ, 71, 118.

Biondi, M., & Pancheri, P. (1995). Clinical research strategies in psychoneuroimmunology: a review of 46 human research studies. B.E. K. Leonard MillerStressthe immune system and psychiatry Wiley & Sons Chichester 85–112.

Corbo, M., Patel, J., Tawab, A., & Davies, J. G. (2006). Evaluating clinical skills of undergraduate pharmacy students using objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). Pharm Educ, 6, 53-58.

Duerson, M. C., Romrell, L. J., & Stevens, C. B. (2000). Impacting faculty teaching and student performance: nine years' experience with the Objective Structured Clinical Examination. Teach Learn Med, 12, 176-182

Duffield, K. E., & Spencer, J. A. (2002). A survey of medical students' views about the purposes and fairness of assessment. Med Educ, 36, 879-886.

Harden, R. M., & Gleeson, F. A. (1979). Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Med Educ, 13, 41-54.

Hodges, B., & Mcilroy, J. H. (2003). Analytic global OSCE ratings are sensitive to level of training. Med Educ, 37, 1012-1016.

Kowlowitz, V., Hoole, A. J., & Sloane, P. D. (1991). Implementing the objective structured clinical examination in a traditional medical school. Acad Med, 66, 345-347.

Martin, I. G., & Jolly, B. (2002). Predictive validity and estimated cut score of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) used as an assessment of clinical skills at the end of the first clinical year. Med Educ, 36, 418-425.

Monaghan, M. S., Vanderbush, R. E., & Mckay, A. B. (1995). Evaluation of clinical skills in pharmaceutical education: past, present and future. Am J Pharm Educ, 59, 354-357.

Newble, D. (2004). Techniques for measuring clinical competence: objective structured clinical examinations. Med Educ, 38, 199-203.

Newble, D., Dawson, B., Dauphinee, D., Page, G., Macdonald, M., Swanson, D., Mulholland, H., Thomson, A., & Van Der Vleuten, C. (1994). Guidelines for assessing clinical competence. Teach Learn Med, 6, 213–220.

Newble, D. I. (1988). Eight years' experience with a structured clinical examination. Med Educ, 22, 200-204.

Pierre, R. B., Wierenga, A., Barton, M., Branday, J. M., & Christie, C. D. (2004). Student evaluation of an OSCE in paediatrics at the University of the West Indies, Jamaica. BMC Med Educ, 4, 22.

Sarid, O., Anson, O., & Bentov, Y. (2005) Students’ reactions to three typical examinations in health sciences. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 10, 291–302.

Sarid, O., Anson, O.,Yaari, A.,& Margalith, M. (2004). Coping styles and changes in humoral reaction during academic stress. Psychol Health Med,9, 85–98.

Stowell, J.R. (2003). Use and abuse of academic examination in stress research. Psychosom Med, 65, 1055–1057.

Woodburn, J., & Sutcliffe, N. (1996). The Reliability, Validity, and Evaluation of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination in Podiatry (Chiropody). Assessment Evaluation Higher Educ, 21, 131-146.

Zartman, R.R., McWhorter, A.G., Seale, N.S., & Boone, W.J. (2002). Using OSCE-based evaluation: curricular impact over time. J Dent Educ,66, 1323–30.

Zeidner, M. (1995). Adaptive coping with test situations: a review of the literature. Educational Psychologist, 30, 123–133.

Downloads

How to Cite

Salih, M. R. M., Bahari, M. B., Azhar, S., Sulaimam, S., Sarriff, A., Yaseen, S. N., & Sari, Y. O. (2015). Pharmacy Student Perceptions and Feedback on the Modified Objective Structured Clinical Examination. Pharmacy Education, 10. Retrieved from https://pharmacyeducation.fip.org/pharmacyeducation/article/view/357

Issue

Vol. 10 (2010)

Section

Research Article

License

It is a condition of the publication that authors vest or license copyright in their articles, including abstracts, in FIP. This enables us to ensure full copyright protection and to disseminate the article, and the journal, to the widest possible readership in print and electronic formats as appropriate. Authors may, of course, use the material elsewhere after publication providing that prior permission is obtained from FIP. Authors are themselves responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyright material from other sources.