ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In osteopathic medicine, palpation is considered to be the key skill to be acquired during training. Whether palpation skills are adequately acquired during undergraduate or postgraduate training is difficult to assess. The aim of our study was to test a palpation assessment tool developed for undergraduate medical education in a postgraduate medical education (PME) setting. METHODS: We modified and standardized an assessment tool, where a coin has to be palpated under different layers of copy paper. For every layer depth we randomized the hiding positions with a random generator. The task was to palpate the coin or to determine that no coin was hidden in the stack. We recruited three groups of participants: 22 physicians with no training in osteopathic medicine, 25 participants in a PME course of osteopathic techniques before and after a palpation training program, 31 physicians from an osteopathic expert group with at least 700 h of osteopathic skills training. These experts ran the test twice to check for test-retest-reliability. Inferential statistical analyzes were performed using generalized linear mixed models with the dichotomous variable "coin detected / not detected" as the dependent variable. RESULTS: We measured a test-retest reliability of the assessment tool as a whole with 56 stations in the expert group of 0.67 (p < 0.001). For different paper layers, we found good retest reliabilities up to 300 sheets. The control group detected a coin significantly better in a depth of 150 sheets (p = 0.01) than the pre-training group. The osteopathic training group showed significantly more correct coin localizations after the training in layer depths of 200 (p = 0.03) and 300 sheets (p = 0.05). This group also had significantly better palpation results than the expert group in the depth of 300 sheets (p = 0.001). When there was no coin hidden, the expert group showed significantly better results than the post-training group (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our tool can be used with reliable results to test palpation course achievements with 200 and 300 sheets of paper. Further refinements of this tool will be needed to use it in complex assessment designs for the evaluation of more sophisticated palpatory skills in postgraduate medical settings.
Subject(s)
Clinical Competence , Education, Medical, Continuing/standards , Palpation , Adult , Clinical Competence/standards , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Palpation/methods , Palpation/standards , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The national competence-based catalogue of learning-goals in surgery (NKLC) defines competence levels for each of its 230 goals, including "competence level in 1: factual knowledge" up to "competence level 3: independent action". Aside from the cumulative examinations influencing the learning behaviour of students, those teaching targets do not affect the second state examination. This study analyses the extent to which the questions of the German second medical licensing examination compiled by the IMPP (central German institute for medical and pharmaceutical examinations) are congruent with the trauma-surgical and orthopaedic learning goals in the NKLC, in which this thematic focus is emphasised. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Exam questions from autumn 2009 to autumn 2014 (n = 11) were retrospectively analysed. Orthopaedic and trauma-surgical teaching targets defined in NKLC were identified by five senior orthopaedic physicians and trauma surgery experts. All questions addressing one of these learning goals were identified and analysed (re: the number of learning goals, the number of questions addressing a trauma-surgical, or orthopaedic goal, as well as different competency levels). RESULTS: We found 113 learning goals of NKLC (49.1% of the overall NKLC learning goals) identified as orthopaedic or trauma surgery subjects. During the study period, 543 questions included teaching targets referring to orthopaedic or trauma surgery subjects (15.6% of the total of 3480 questions). Per exam, a mean of 49.36 ± 14.1 questions (minimum 30; maximum 80) was identified that addressed a learning goal referring to these issues. For each exam, 13.45 ± 6.39 (minimum 6; maximum 24) questions referred to learning goals of competence level 3a and b, 21.45 ± 9.94 (minimum 9; maximum 39) questions referred to learning goals of competence level 2, and 14.45 ± 6.36 (minimum 6; maximum 25) questions referred to learning goals of competence level 1. Most questions addressed the topic: "disorders of the rheumatic spectrum" (n = 16 questions in autumn 2009). CONCLUSION: Questions focusing on orthopaedic and trauma surgery appeared sufficiently often during the second state examination. There is a thematic imbalance, and important clinical learning goals tagged with high competence levels were not addressed in a satisfactory manner. This indicates that a clear adjustment between the state examination and NKLC is necessary.
