Lagoo Jui Y, Joshi Shilpa B
Department of Anaesthesia, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Anaesthesia, St John's Medical College Hospital, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.
Indian J Anaesth. 2021 Mar;65(3):202-209. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_124_20. Epub 2021 Mar 13.
Formative assessment of procedural skills of Anaesthesiology postgraduate (PG) students is not conducted conventionally. Direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) helps to identify gaps in performance and provides structured feedback. The present study was taken to explore perceptions of PG students and faculty about DOPS.
This mixed design interventional study was conducted on 12 PGs and 10 faculty members in Department of Anaesthesiology. After conducting DOPS, a pre-validated questionnaire was given to them about perceptions using 3-point Likert's scale along with open ended questions. Statistical analysis was done using descriptive statistics of perception to calculate percentages and themes were identified for qualitative data.
Responses of students were positive about skill improvement (83%), time provided (75%), feedback (100%), interaction (83%), motivation (83%), satisfaction (83%), effectiveness (83%) and opportunity creation (92%). Faculty responded positively regarding change in attitude (100%), effectiveness (100%), scope (90%), feasible application (90%), ease (90%), opportunity creation (80%), gap identification (100%), satisfaction (80%). However, 60% felt training was required, 50% thought more time and commitment was required. Themes identified were DOPS is comprehensive, interactive, student-friendly, good teaching-learning tool, identifies gaps, provides focus for learning, provides systematic constructive feedback, improves skills, prepares for future practice, requires planning, may not reflect competence, has assessor variability and can be included in PG curriculum.
DOPS was perceived as an effective assessment and teaching-learning tool by PG students as well as faculty.
传统上未对麻醉学研究生的操作技能进行形成性评估。直接观察操作技能（DOPS）有助于识别表现中的差距并提供结构化反馈。本研究旨在探讨研究生和教师对DOPS的看法。
本混合设计干预性研究在麻醉学系的12名研究生和10名教师中进行。在进行DOPS后，向他们发放一份预先验证的问卷，使用3点李克特量表询问他们的看法，并设置开放式问题。使用感知的描述性统计数据进行统计分析以计算百分比，并为定性数据确定主题。
学生对技能提升（83%）、提供的时间（75%）、反馈（100%）、互动（83%）、动机（83%）、满意度（83%）、有效性（83%）和创造机会（92%）的反应积极。教师对态度改变（100%）、有效性（100%）、范围（90%）、可行应用（90%）、便利性（90%）、创造机会（80%）、识别差距（100%）、满意度（80%）的反应积极。然而，60%的人认为需要培训，50%的人认为需要更多时间和投入。确定的主题包括DOPS全面、互动、对学生友好、是良好的教学工具、识别差距、为学习提供重点、提供系统的建设性反馈、提高技能、为未来实践做准备、需要规划、可能无法反映能力、存在评估者差异并且可纳入研究生课程。
研究生和教师都认为DOPS是一种有效的评估和教学工具。
