DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) in undergraduate skills-lab: Does it work? Analysis of skills-performance and curricular side effects.

GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung Pub Date : 2015-10-15 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01 DOI:10.3205/zma000987
Christoph Profanter, Alexander Perathoner
{"title":"DOPS (Direct Observation of Procedural Skills) in undergraduate skills-lab: Does it work? Analysis of skills-performance and curricular side effects.","authors":"Christoph Profanter,&nbsp;Alexander Perathoner","doi":"10.3205/zma000987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Sufficient teaching and assessing clinical skills in the undergraduate setting becomes more and more important. In a surgical skills-lab course at the Medical University of Innsbruck fourth year students were teached with DOPS (direct observation of procedural skills). We analyzed whether DOPS worked or not in this setting, which performance levels could be reached compared to tutor teaching (one tutor, 5 students) and which curricular side effects could be observed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a prospective randomized trial in summer 2013 (April - June) four competence-level-based skills were teached in small groups during one week: surgical abdominal examination, urethral catheterization (phantom), rectal-digital examination (phantom), handling of central venous catheters. Group A was teached with DOPS, group B with a classical tutor system. Both groups underwent an OSCE (objective structured clinical examination) for assessment. 193 students were included in the study. Altogether 756 OSCE´s were carried out, 209 (27,6%) in the DOPS- and 547 (72,3%) in the tutor-group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups reached high performance levels. In the first month there was a statistically significant difference (p<0,05) in performance of 95% positive OSCE items in the DOPS-group versus 88% in the tutor group. In the following months the performance rates showed no difference anymore and came to 90% in both groups. In practical skills the analysis revealed a high correspondence between positive DOPS (92,4%) and OSCE (90,8%) results.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>As shown by our data DOPS furnish high performance of clinical skills and work well in the undergraduate setting. Due to the high correspondence of DOPS and OSCE results DOPS should be considered as preferred assessment tool in a students skills-lab. The approximation of performance-rates within the months after initial superiority of DOPS could be explained by an interaction between DOPS and tutor system: DOPS elements seem to have improved tutoring and performance rates as well. DOPS in students 'skills-lab afford structured feedback and assessment without increased personnel and financial resources compared to classic small group training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, this study shows that DOPS represent an efficient method in teaching clinical skills. Their effects on didactic culture reach beyond the positive influence of performance rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":30054,"journal":{"name":"GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3205/zma000987","citationCount":"30","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma000987","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: 30

Abstract

Objective: Sufficient teaching and assessing clinical skills in the undergraduate setting becomes more and more important. In a surgical skills-lab course at the Medical University of Innsbruck fourth year students were teached with DOPS (direct observation of procedural skills). We analyzed whether DOPS worked or not in this setting, which performance levels could be reached compared to tutor teaching (one tutor, 5 students) and which curricular side effects could be observed.

Methods: In a prospective randomized trial in summer 2013 (April - June) four competence-level-based skills were teached in small groups during one week: surgical abdominal examination, urethral catheterization (phantom), rectal-digital examination (phantom), handling of central venous catheters. Group A was teached with DOPS, group B with a classical tutor system. Both groups underwent an OSCE (objective structured clinical examination) for assessment. 193 students were included in the study. Altogether 756 OSCE´s were carried out, 209 (27,6%) in the DOPS- and 547 (72,3%) in the tutor-group.

Results: Both groups reached high performance levels. In the first month there was a statistically significant difference (p<0,05) in performance of 95% positive OSCE items in the DOPS-group versus 88% in the tutor group. In the following months the performance rates showed no difference anymore and came to 90% in both groups. In practical skills the analysis revealed a high correspondence between positive DOPS (92,4%) and OSCE (90,8%) results.

Discussion: As shown by our data DOPS furnish high performance of clinical skills and work well in the undergraduate setting. Due to the high correspondence of DOPS and OSCE results DOPS should be considered as preferred assessment tool in a students skills-lab. The approximation of performance-rates within the months after initial superiority of DOPS could be explained by an interaction between DOPS and tutor system: DOPS elements seem to have improved tutoring and performance rates as well. DOPS in students 'skills-lab afford structured feedback and assessment without increased personnel and financial resources compared to classic small group training.

Conclusion: In summary, this study shows that DOPS represent an efficient method in teaching clinical skills. Their effects on didactic culture reach beyond the positive influence of performance rates.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

DOPS(程序技能的直接观察)在本科技能实验室:它有效吗?技能表现和课程副作用分析。
目的:充分的临床技能教学和评估在本科教学中变得越来越重要。因斯布鲁克医科大学的一门外科技能实验室课程向四年级学生讲授DOPS(直接观察手术技能)。我们分析了DOPS在这种情况下是否有效,与导师教学(1名导师,5名学生)相比,可以达到哪些表现水平,以及可以观察到哪些课程副作用。方法:在2013年夏季(4 - 6月)的一项前瞻性随机试验中,在一周的时间内,以小组为单位教授四项基于能力水平的技能:外科腹部检查、尿道置管(幻像)、直肠指诊(幻像)、中心静脉置管的处理。A组采用DOPS教学,B组采用经典导师制教学。两组均接受客观结构化临床检查(OSCE)进行评估。193名学生参与了这项研究。总共进行了756次欧安组织的调查,其中ops组209次(27.6%),导师组547次(72.3%)。结果:两组均达到高水平。在第一个月,有统计学上的显著差异(p讨论:根据我们的数据显示,DOPS提供了很高的临床技能表现,在本科环境中工作得很好。由于DOPS和欧安组织结果的高度对应,DOPS应被视为学生技能实验室的首选评估工具。在DOPS取得初步优势后的几个月内,绩效率的近似可以用DOPS与导师制度之间的相互作用来解释:DOPS要素似乎也提高了辅导和绩效率。与传统的小组培训相比,学生技能实验室的DOPS提供了结构化的反馈和评估,而无需增加人力和财力资源。结论:本研究表明,DOPS是一种有效的临床技能教学方法。它们对教学文化的影响超出了表现率的积极影响。
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