Department of Surgery, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Med Educ Online. 2012;17. doi: 10.3402/meo.v17i0.18398. Epub 2012 Aug 23.
The objective was to systematically review the literature to identify and grade tools used for the end point assessment of procedural skills (e.g., phlebotomy, IV cannulation, suturing) competence in medical students prior to certification. The authors searched eight bibliographic databases electronically - ERIC, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Psychinfo, PsychLIT, EBM Reviews and the Cochrane databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed the literature to identify procedural assessment tools used specifically for assessing medical students within the PRISMA framework, the inclusion/exclusion criteria and search period. Papers on OSATS and DOPS were excluded as they focused on post-registration assessment and clinical rather than simulated competence. Of 659 abstracted articles 56 identified procedural assessment tools. Only 11 specifically assessed medical students. The final 11 studies consisted of 1 randomised controlled trial, 4 comparative and 6 descriptive studies yielding 12 heterogeneous procedural assessment tools for analysis. Seven tools addressed four discrete pre-certification skills, basic suture (3), airway management (2), nasogastric tube insertion (1) and intravenous cannulation (1). One tool used a generic assessment of procedural skills. Two tools focused on postgraduate laparoscopic skills and one on osteopathic students and thus were not included in this review. The levels of evidence are low with regard to reliability - κ = 0.65-0.71 and minimum validity is achieved - face and content. In conclusion, there are no tools designed specifically to assess competence of procedural skills in a final certification examination. There is a need to develop standardised tools with proven reliability and validity for assessment of procedural skills competence at the end of medical training. Medicine graduates must have comparable levels of procedural skills acquisition entering the clinical workforce irrespective of the country of training.
目的是系统地回顾文献,以确定和评估在医学学生获得认证之前用于评估程序性技能(例如,采血、静脉插管、缝合)能力的终点评估工具。作者在八个文献数据库中进行了电子搜索,包括 ERIC、Medline、CINAHL、EMBASE、Psychinfo、PsychLIT、EBM Reviews 和 Cochrane 数据库。两名审查员独立审查文献,以确定在 PRISMA 框架内专门用于评估医学学生的程序评估工具、纳入/排除标准和搜索期。由于 OSATS 和 DOPS 侧重于注册后评估和临床而不是模拟能力,因此排除了这些文章。在 659 篇摘要文章中,有 56 篇文章确定了程序评估工具。只有 11 项专门评估了医学生。最后 11 项研究包括 1 项随机对照试验、4 项比较研究和 6 项描述性研究,得出 12 种不同的程序评估工具进行分析。7 种工具分别涉及 4 种离散的认证前技能,包括基础缝合(3 种)、气道管理(2 种)、鼻胃管插入(1 种)和静脉插管(1 种)。一种工具使用了一种通用的程序技能评估方法。两种工具侧重于研究生腹腔镜技能,一种工具侧重于整骨学生,因此未包含在本次综述中。证据水平在可靠性方面较低 - κ = 0.65-0.71,最低有效性是通过面部和内容来实现的。总之,没有专门用于评估最终认证考试中程序性技能能力的工具。需要开发具有可靠和有效性的标准化工具,以评估医学培训结束时的程序性技能能力。无论培训所在的国家如何,医学毕业生进入临床工作队伍时都必须具备可比的程序性技能获取水平。