ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2019
Application of an objective structured clinical examination to evaluate and monitor intern's proficiency of hand hygiene and personal protective equipment use in the United States.
Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness and Utility of Virtual Reality Simulation as an Educational Tool for Safe Performance of COVID-19 Diagnostics: Prospective, Randomized Pilot Trial.JMIR serious games · 2021Article
- Rapid Dissemination of a COVID-19 Airway Management Simulation Using a Train-the-Trainers Curriculum.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2021Article
- Empirical analysis comparing the tele-objective structured clinical examination (teleOSCE) and the in-person assessment in Australia.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2021Observational
- Comparison of students' performance of objective structured clinical examination during clinical practice.Korean journal of medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine if an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) could be used to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and personal protective equipment (PPE) proficiency for medical interns in the United States.
methodsInterns in July 2015 (N=123, Cohort 1) without OSCE-based contact precaution evaluation and teaching were evaluated early 2016 by OSCE for hand hygiene and PPE proficiency. They performed poorly. Therefore, the new interns entering July 2016 (N=151, Cohort 2) were immediately tested in the same OSCE station as Cohort 1 and provided feedback and teaching. Cohort 2 was then retested in the OSCE station early 2017. The Mann Whitney U test was used to compare Cohort 1 vs. Cohort 2 performances on checklist items. Cohort 2 performance differences at the beginning and end of the intern year were compared using McNemar's X2 test for paired nominal data.
resultsChecklist items were scored, summed and reported as percent correct. In Cohort 2, the mean percent correct was higher in posttest than pretest, 92% vs. 77% )(P <0 .0001). The passing rate (100% correct) was significantly higher, 55% vs. 16%. Comparing Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 at the end of intern year, the mean percent correct was higher for Cohort 2 compared to Cohort 1, 95% vs 90% (P < 0.0001). 55% of the Cohort 2 passed (a perfect score) compared to 24% in Cohort 1 (P < 0.0001).
conclusionAn OSCE can be utilized to evaluate and monitor hand hygiene and PPE proficiency for interns in the United States.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.