Abstract

Aim: The College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences (CMNHS), Fiji National University (FNU) implemented the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) for the final year MBBS in 2019. This study was set out to explore student acceptance of the OSCE as an assessment. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey using a 33-item self-administered questionnaire that was completed by 74 medical interns. Main outcome measures were student perception of examination attributes including the quality of instructions and organization, the quality of performance, authenticity and transparency of the process and the usefulness of OSCE as an assessment instrument compared to the Traditional Clinical Examination (TCE). Results: There was overwhelming dissent of the OSCE with respect to the comprehensiveness (33%), fairness (44%) and authenticity of the required tasks (51%). Majority felt that it was an intimidating (58%) and strong anxiety producing experience (85%). Concerns were raised regarding the inadequacy of time for expected tasks. Conclusion: The OSCE was perceived negatively by the students. Concerns and challenges regarding an assessment that is overwhelmingly complex, resource and time intensive can be overcome with better preparation of both the students and examiners.

• 1.   Harden RM. What is an OSCE? Med Teach [Internet]. 1988 Jan 3 [cited 2020 Aug 2];10(1):19–22. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/ doi/full/10.3109/01421598809019321.
• 2.   Harden RM, Stevenson M, Downie WW, Wilson GM. Assessment of clinical competence using objective structured examination. Br Med J [Internet]. 1975 Feb 22 [cited 2020 Aug 2];1(5955):447–51. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/1115966.
• 3.   Ameh N, Abdul MA, Adesiyun GA, Avidime S. Objective structured clinical examination vs traditional clinical examination: An evaluation of students’ perception and preference in a Nigerian medical school. Niger Med J [Internet]. 2014 Jul [cited 2020 Jun 29];55(4):310–3. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/25114366.
• 4.   Pierre RB, Wierenga A, Barton M, Michael Branday J, Christie CD. BMC Medical Education Student evaluation of an OSCE in paediatrics at the University of the West Indies, Jamaica. 2004 [cited 2020 Jun 29]; Available from: http://www. biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/4/22.
• 5.   Allen R, Heard J, Savidge M, Bittergle J, Cantrell M, Huffmaster T. Surveying Students’ Attitudes During the OSCE. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2020 Aug 2];3(3):197– 206. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pubmed/12386441.
• 6.   Wani PD. Traditional clinical examination vs objective structured practical examination in human physiology: Examiner’s bias. Int J Med Sci Public Heal Online [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Jul 30]; Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar. org/e029/5ee9ce2a97df414cd62ffc1fb869ea7bc47d. pdf.
• 7.   Azim Majumder A, Kumar A, Krishnamurthy K, Ojeh N, Adams OP, Sa B. An evaluative study of objective structured clinical examination (OSCE): students and examiners perspectives. Adv Med Educ Pract [Internet]. 2019 Jun 5 [cited 2020 Aug 9];Volume 10:387–97. Available from: https:// www.dovepress.com/an-evaluative-study-ofobjective-structured-clinical-examination-osce-- peer-reviewed-article-AMEP.

Data Sharing Statement

Funding