Evaluation of perception regarding feasibility of introducing objective structured practical examination (OSPE) in the department of anatomy

Abstract

Despite a tremendous reformation in medical education during present time, the need of an hour is to adopt certain new assessment methodologies along with classical practical examination (CPE). Classical practical examination raises the concern about standardization, uniformity and examiner variability. To overcome all these, OSPE was introduced which is a highly objective, reliable and valid method of assessment. Materials and Methods: The present study was aimed to assess student an d faculty perception regarding the feasibility of OSPE implementation for first time in the practical examination of first professional undergraduate students. The study was conducted on 135 medical students in the Department of anatomy at LNMC & JK Hospital, Bhopal, India. OSPE was organized and conducted at the Department of Anatomy with the help of trained faculties and organizing staff. Subject experts formed twelve OSPE stations after a lot of brainstorming and input in terms of time, effort and teamwork. After validation of the questions, a standard questionnaire was used to obtain students and faculty feedback on the perception of OSPE conducted. Result: Majority of the students and faculty favored implementation of OSPE as a tool for formative assessment Conclusion: Based on both the students and faculty feedback, we concluded that no single method of assessment is best. But OSPE should be used for formative assessment.

Fine‐tuning the standard setting of objective structured practical examinations in clinical anatomy

“…The OSCEs are now widely used to assess clinical competence, including history taking, physical examination, clinical procedures, diagnosis and management, communication, and professionalism 3,4 . The OSCEs underpinned the approach to the assessment of anatomy knowledge in the laboratory setting in the form of objective structured practical examinations (OSPE) 5‐7 . Each OSPE station may consist of multiple questions encompassing the identification of structures and relevant gross anatomical features and relating the structures to their normal function and corresponding pathology, as well as extension questions that test higher‐order cognitive and psychomotor domains by solving clinical problems related to a specific structure or region 7,8 .…”

“…3,4 The OSCEs underpinned the approach to the assessment of anatomy knowledge in the laboratory setting in the form of objective structured practical examinations (OSPE). [5][6][7] Each OSPE station may consist of multiple questions encompassing the identification of structures and relevant gross anatomical features and relating the structures to their normal function and corresponding pathology, as well as extension questions that test higher-order cognitive and psychomotor domains by solving clinical problems related to a specific structure or region. 7,8 Unlike a traditional anatomy spotter test, OSPEs are integrated examinations that allow for the assessment of the application of the knowledge of anatomy and cover a wider range of learning objectives at different levels of Bloom's taxonomy.…”

“…7,8 Unlike a traditional anatomy spotter test, OSPEs are integrated examinations that allow for the assessment of the application of the knowledge of anatomy and cover a wider range of learning objectives at different levels of Bloom's taxonomy. 5,7 Objective structured practical examinations can also incorporate related questions from other disciplines such as physiology and pharmacology making the examination more integrated. 9 Furthermore, OSPEs can be used to assess more complex educational goals such as application of anatomy knowledge and the mastery of technical skills in ultrasound anatomy education.…”

Study of OSPE as a Method of Assessment in the Anatomy: Implementation and Attitude among MBBS students

“…[6]. Students' perceptions of OSPE have been found to be favorable [7]. OSPE ensures the integration of teaching and evaluation [8].…”