Electronic acquisition of OSCE performance using tablets.

GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung Pub Date : 2015-10-15 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01 DOI:10.3205/zma000983
Achim Hochlehnert, Jobst-Hendrik Schultz, Andreas Möltner, Sevgi Tımbıl, Konstantin Brass, Jana Jünger
{"title":"Electronic acquisition of OSCE performance using tablets.","authors":"Achim Hochlehnert,&nbsp;Jobst-Hendrik Schultz,&nbsp;Andreas Möltner,&nbsp;Sevgi Tımbıl,&nbsp;Konstantin Brass,&nbsp;Jana Jünger","doi":"10.3205/zma000983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) often involve a considerable amount of resources in terms of materials and organization since the scores are often recorded on paper. Computer-assisted administration is an alternative with which the need for material resources can be reduced. In particular, the use of tablets seems sensible because these are easy to transport and flexible to use.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>User acceptance concerning the use of tablets during OSCEs has not yet been extensively investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate tablet-based OSCEs from the perspective of the user (examiner) and the student examinee.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>For two OSCEs in Internal Medicine at the University of Heidelberg, user acceptance was analyzed regarding tablet-based administration (satisfaction with functionality) and the subjective amount of effort as perceived by the examiners. Standardized questionnaires and semi-standardized interviews were conducted (complete survey of all participating examiners). In addition, for one OSCE, the subjective evaluation of this mode of assessment was gathered from a random sample of participating students in semi-standardized interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the examiners were very satisfied with using tablets during the assessment. The subjective amount of effort to use the tablet was found on average to be \"hardly difficult\". The examiners identified the advantages of this mode of administration as being in particular the ease of use and low rate of error. During the interviews of the examinees, acceptance for the use of tablets during the assessment was also detected.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Overall, it was found that the use of tablets during OSCEs was well accepted by both examiners and examinees. We expect that this mode of assessment also offers advantages regarding assessment documentation, use of resources, and rate of error in comparison with paper-based assessments; all of these aspects should be followed up on in further studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":30054,"journal":{"name":"GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung","volume":"32 4","pages":"Doc41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4606489/pdf/","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma000983","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) often involve a considerable amount of resources in terms of materials and organization since the scores are often recorded on paper. Computer-assisted administration is an alternative with which the need for material resources can be reduced. In particular, the use of tablets seems sensible because these are easy to transport and flexible to use.

Aim: User acceptance concerning the use of tablets during OSCEs has not yet been extensively investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate tablet-based OSCEs from the perspective of the user (examiner) and the student examinee.

Method: For two OSCEs in Internal Medicine at the University of Heidelberg, user acceptance was analyzed regarding tablet-based administration (satisfaction with functionality) and the subjective amount of effort as perceived by the examiners. Standardized questionnaires and semi-standardized interviews were conducted (complete survey of all participating examiners). In addition, for one OSCE, the subjective evaluation of this mode of assessment was gathered from a random sample of participating students in semi-standardized interviews.

Results: Overall, the examiners were very satisfied with using tablets during the assessment. The subjective amount of effort to use the tablet was found on average to be "hardly difficult". The examiners identified the advantages of this mode of administration as being in particular the ease of use and low rate of error. During the interviews of the examinees, acceptance for the use of tablets during the assessment was also detected.

Discussion: Overall, it was found that the use of tablets during OSCEs was well accepted by both examiners and examinees. We expect that this mode of assessment also offers advantages regarding assessment documentation, use of resources, and rate of error in comparison with paper-based assessments; all of these aspects should be followed up on in further studies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

使用平板电脑电子获取欧安组织性能。
背景:目的结构化临床检查(OSCEs)通常在材料和组织方面涉及相当多的资源,因为分数通常记录在纸上。计算机辅助管理是一种替代方法,可以减少对物质资源的需求。特别是,使用平板电脑似乎是明智的,因为它们易于运输和灵活使用。目的:用户对欧安会议期间使用片剂的接受程度尚未广泛调查。本研究的目的是从使用者(考官)和学生考生的角度来评价基于平板电脑的osce。方法:对于海德堡大学内科的两名osce,分析了用户对基于片剂的给药(功能满意度)和审查员感知的主观工作量的接受程度。采用标准化问卷和半标准化访谈(对所有参与审查员进行完整调查)。此外,对于一个欧安组织,对这种评估模式的主观评价是从参加半标准化访谈的学生随机抽样中收集的。结果:总体而言,审查员对片剂的使用非常满意。使用平板电脑的主观工作量平均为“几乎很难”。审查员确定了这种管理模式的优点,特别是易于使用和错误率低。在与考生的面谈中,也发现在评估期间接受使用片剂。讨论:总的来说,我们发现在oses期间片剂的使用被考官和考生都很好地接受。与纸质评估相比,我们期望这种评估模式在评估文件、资源使用和错误率方面也具有优势;所有这些方面都应该在进一步的研究中跟进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信