• Tobias GS
• Goubran EZ

• Association of Chiropractic Colleges / congresses

METHODS:Eighty-eight students participated in an OSCE at the end of the first year of chiropractic education (ICE I). ICE I consisted of six clinical performance stations – history, physical exam, neuromusculoskeletal exam, palpation, soft tissue procedures, and radiology using standardized patients. There was also a written exam in multiple-choice format on 6basic science disciplines – general anatomy, functional anatomy & biomechanics, biochemistry & nutrition, neuroscience, physiology, and general pathology & immunology. Each checklist item and each written exam question was attributed to at least one clinical competency, e.g., history taking, physical exam, radiological exam, etc. Students at the end of the exam received a score sheet, showing their responses/performance points in each item pertaining to each clinical and basic science station. This score sheet is used by the students to check their responses against the learning objectives and competencies posted on a website. A survey at the end of the ICE I, based on a five-point Likert scale, was used to assess the students’ satisfaction with the exam process and suitability for assessment of their knowledge and clinical skills.

RESULTS: The results of the survey indicate that the level of agreement of the students regarding the helpfulness of course information and orientation provided at the website was at 87%. Level of agreement of students that the knowledge and skills tested were appropriate to their level of education at time of exam was 80%, and their satisfaction with the overall ICE I as a valuable educational experience was 89%.

DISCUSSION: The OSCE-style evaluation of students at the end of the first year of chiropractic education (ICE I) was originally designed to use a combination of clinical performance stations with standardized patients and written basic science exams to assess students’ skills and knowledge and their ability to integrate the two. With the current iteration of this evaluation it is possible to assign items from the individual performance station checklists and written exams to specific clinical competencies. Each student’s outcome for each item can be exported to a website to provide feedback and to project the level of clinical competence. The student surveys indicate satisfaction with the feedback in the website, exam process and suitability for assessment of their knowledge and clinical skills. The global outcomes of ICE I may be used for additional purposes including providing evidence of students’ learning, to demonstrate integration of basic science knowledge with clinical skills performance, and to provide outcome measures for future curricular design.

CONCLUSION: Our results showed a high level of students’ satisfaction with ICE as a useful educational experience and appreciation of the feedback process via the website. The global outcomes of ICE I may be used to provide evidence of students’ learning and improve on future curriculum design.

This abstract is reproduced with the permission of the publisher.