Growth of self-perceived clinical competence in postgraduate training for general practice and its relation to potentially influencing factors.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the increase in self-perceived clinical competence during a three-year postgraduate training in general practice and to explore the relation between the growth of self-perceived competence and several background variables. DESIGN: Cohort, 1995-1998. SETTING: Three-year Postgraduate Training for General practice in the Netherlands PARTICIPANTS: All Dutch trainees who followed postgraduate training from September 1995 to September 1998 (N=191). INTERVENTION: We asked the trainees at the start and at the end of their postgraduate training to complete a questionnaire, which assessed their self-perceived knowledge, clinical skills and consultations skills. We collected information about potentially influencing background variables. Amongst these were variables such as: age, gender, prior medical experience, the effort someone has spent upon her/his education, insight in weak and strong areas of clinical competence and knowledge and skills levels. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-perceived competence. RESULTS: A total of 127 trainees completed both questionnaires (190 at the first administration and 128 at the second one). We found statistically significant growth of self-perceived clinical competence. Self-perceived consultation skills increased more than self-perceived knowledge and clinical skills. The afore mentioned background variables did not relate in any way with the growth of self-perceived clinical competence. CONCLUSION: This study shows that a 3-year postgraduate training in general practice enhances self-perceived clinical competence. However, we still do not know how to explain this improvement. Further study into the theoretical concept of self-assessment in medical education and into the factors contributing to the feeling of being competent, is required.

Predictive validity of a written knowledge test of skills for an OSCE in postgraduate training for general practice.

PURPOSE: To examine the validity of a written knowledge test of skills for performance on an OSCE in postgraduate training for general practice. METHODS: A randomly-selected sample of 47 trainees in general practice took a knowledge test of skills, a general knowledge test and an OSCE. The OSCE included technical stations and stations including complete patient encounters. Each station was checklist rated and global rated. RESULTS: The knowledge test of skills was better correlated to the OSCE than the general knowledge test. Technical stations were better correlated to the knowledge test of skills than stations including complete patient encounters. For the technical stations the rating system had no influence on the correlation. For the stations including complete patient encounters the checklist rating correlated better to the knowledge test of skills than the global rating. CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the predictive validity of the knowledge test of skills. In postgraduate training for general practice a written knowledge test of skills can be used as an instrument to estimate the level of clinical skills, especially for group evaluation, such as in studies examining the efficacy of a training programme or as a screening instrument for deciding about courses to be offered. This estimation is more accurate when the content of the test matches the skills under study. However, written testing of skills cannot replace direct observation of performance of skills.