Perception of Medical and Nursing Students Plus Clinical Instructors Towards Objective Structured Clinical Examination: A Case Study of Five Health Training Institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Abstract

Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is the gold standard for assessing clinical competencies. However, resource constraints and logistical challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) hinder its effectiveness. This study investigated the perceptions and experiences of medical and nursing students and clinical instructors toward OSCE in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

Methods: A mixed-methods sequential explanatory design was utilized involving 686 undergraduate health care students and 46 clinical instructors from Busitema University (Uganda), Mzuzu University (Malawi), University of Ibadan (Nigeria), Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (Ghana), and University of Zambia (Zambia). Quantitative responses were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 25, with comparisons between medical and nursing student responses made using chi-square test. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed.

Results: A total of 686 students and 42 clinical instructors participated in the study. Majority of students 57.6% (n = 395, P-value < 0.001) and 71.8% (n = 33) instructors recognized OSCE as a comprehensive tool for assessing clinical skills and knowledge, respectively. Among students, 80.8% (n = 554, P-value = 0.031), 66.6% (n = 457, P-value = 0.001), 66.6% (n = 456, P-value = 0.020) and 61.4% (n = 421, P-value = 0.001) cited anxiety, station timing, examiners' behavior and content load as factors influencing performance. Of the clinical instructors 58.7% (n = 27) noted that it takes longer time to prepare scenarios, however 71.8% (n = 33) highlighted its objectivity. Students praised OSCE's objectivity but criticized insufficient time on some stations and organizational issues. Facilitators cited objectivity and competence assessment but noted resource insufficiencies and student stress. Suggestions for improvement included mock OSCEs, training of clinical instructors, mixed method assessment and feedback to improve performance.

Conclusion: In conclusion, while OSCE demonstrates significant strengths in promoting fairness in assessing clinical competencies, addressing logistical challenges, examiner variability, student anxiety, and timely feedback is crucial.