Evaluating skills and competencies of pre-registration pharmacists using objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs)
Keywords:Competence, objective structured clinical examination, pre-registration, training, pharmacists
Introduction: This paper describes data collected over a period of 4 years in the former South Thames Region, UK, where objective structured clinical examination (OSCEs) have been used to assess pre-registration pharmacists in a secondary care setting. The study aims to describe a quantitative measure of competence using OSCE style assessments of graduate, pre- registration pharmacists.
Method: All pre-registration pharmacists within the South Thames Region undertook a series of OSCEs; data were collected over a period of 4 years. Competence was assessed in each OSCE workstation using a pre-defined checklist.
Results: In total, 223 pre-registration graduates participated; two thirds (67.9%) were female and the majority (62.7%) were trained in district general hospitals. Overall, 17.2% of graduates were deemed competent at the beginning of their pre- registration year compared to 68.3% at the end. This represents a significant improvement in clinical skills performance over the year (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Z 1⁄4 212.024; p 1⁄4 0.005).
Discussion: The training program undertaken by pre-registration pharmacists significantly improved the clinical competence of these graduates in the areas measured, with two thirds considered competent overall at the end of the year. Of particular concern is the apparent inability of graduates to monitor prescriptions appropriately. The findings of this study have significant implications for workforce training and career planning. New graduates should not be working in isolation but should be considered as training grades and given support within the clinical team to develop their skills. Newly registered pharmacists should not be expected to undertake the range of tasks currently allocated to them, without appropriate supervision and further competency assessment.
Anonymous (2000). Anonymous Students call for end in multiple choice for registration examination. Pharmaceutical Journal, 264, 612.
Beck, D., Boh, L., & O’Sullivan, P. S. (1995). Evaluating student performance in the experiential setting with confidence. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 59, 236–246.
Dajani, S. (2004). Does the registration examination serve any fair or useful purpose? Pharmaceutical Journal, 273, 712.
Forde, R. (1997). BPSA not happy (letters). Pharmaceutical Journal, 259.
Harden, R., Stevenson, M., Downie, W., & Wilson, G. (1975). Assessment of clinical competence using Objective Structured Examination. British Medical Journal, 1, 447–451.
Longshaw, R. (2004). Examination should be abandoned. Pharmaceutical Journal, 273, 783.
Mathur, C., Forde, R., Wragg, P., & Hariss, W. (1997). Pre-registration: Whose failure?. Pharmaceutical Journal, 258, 587.
Miller, G. (1990). Commentary on assessment of clinical skills with standardized patients: State of the art. Ibid, 2, 77–78.
McRobbie, D., & Davies, G. (1996). Assessing clinical competence- a new method of evaluating hospital pre-registration trainees. Pharmaceutical Journal, 256, 908–910.
Royal Pharmaceutical Society (1992). The registration examination. Pharmaceutical Journal, 248, 250.
Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. (2005). Preregistration Tutor Information 2005/2006.
SPSS Inc. (1998). SPSS Base 8.0 for Windows User’s Guide. Chicago IL: SPSS Inc.