新冠肺炎期间的欧安组织虚拟考试来自考官和考生的360满意度评估。

Danielle Jenkins, Joseph Y Nashed, Naji J Touma
{"title":"新冠肺炎期间的欧安组织虚拟考试来自考官和考生的360满意度评估。","authors":"Danielle Jenkins,&nbsp;Joseph Y Nashed,&nbsp;Naji J Touma","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.8332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We sought to determine the satisfaction rates of examiners and candidates in a virtual Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) of graduating Canadian urology residents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An annual mock exam, aimed at simulating the licencing urology exam for Canadian graduates, was moved to an online format for the 2020 cohort. This exam consists of an OSCE, and a written multiple-choice exam. The Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ), a previously validated tool for clinical encounters with three sub-domains (quality of care provided, similarity to face-to-face encounter, and perception of the interaction) was modified for the purposes of evaluating the OSCE encounter. The TSQ was sent electronically to all examiners and candidates after the exam.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 14/16 responses from examiners (87.5%) and 24/39 responses from candidates (61.5%). Overall, the format was judged to be a good experience by 13/14 (92.9%) of examiners and 21/24 (87.5%) of candidates; however, when asked specifically if the virtual OSCE was an acceptable way to determine a candidate's competency to practice urology independently, only 8/14 (57.1%) of examiners and 15/24 (62.5%) of candidates agreed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates an overall good satisfaction rate among both examiners and candidates when using a teleconference format for a mock OSCE.</p>","PeriodicalId":9574,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada","volume":" ","pages":"E315-E318"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10581729/pdf/cuaj-10-e315.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virtual OSCE examinations during COVID-19 A 360 satisfaction assessment from examiners and candidates.\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Jenkins,&nbsp;Joseph Y Nashed,&nbsp;Naji J Touma\",\"doi\":\"10.5489/cuaj.8332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We sought to determine the satisfaction rates of examiners and candidates in a virtual Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) of graduating Canadian urology residents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An annual mock exam, aimed at simulating the licencing urology exam for Canadian graduates, was moved to an online format for the 2020 cohort. This exam consists of an OSCE, and a written multiple-choice exam. The Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ), a previously validated tool for clinical encounters with three sub-domains (quality of care provided, similarity to face-to-face encounter, and perception of the interaction) was modified for the purposes of evaluating the OSCE encounter. The TSQ was sent electronically to all examiners and candidates after the exam.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 14/16 responses from examiners (87.5%) and 24/39 responses from candidates (61.5%). Overall, the format was judged to be a good experience by 13/14 (92.9%) of examiners and 21/24 (87.5%) of candidates; however, when asked specifically if the virtual OSCE was an acceptable way to determine a candidate's competency to practice urology independently, only 8/14 (57.1%) of examiners and 15/24 (62.5%) of candidates agreed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates an overall good satisfaction rate among both examiners and candidates when using a teleconference format for a mock OSCE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"E315-E318\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10581729/pdf/cuaj-10-e315.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8332\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:我们试图确定加拿大泌尿外科毕业生虚拟目标结构化临床考试(OSCE)中考官和考生的满意度。方法:旨在模拟加拿大毕业生泌尿外科执照考试的年度模拟考试被改为2020年的在线形式。该考试由OSCE和书面多项选择题考试组成。远程医疗满意度问卷(TSQ)是一种以前验证过的用于临床接触的工具,分为三个子领域(提供的护理质量、与面对面接触的相似性和对互动的感知),为了评估OSCE接触,对其进行了修改。考试结束后,TSQ以电子方式发送给所有考官和考生。结果:考官的回复为14/16(87.5%),考生的回复为24/39(61.5%)。总体而言,13/14(92.9%)的考官和21/24(87.5%;然而,当被问及虚拟OSCE是否是确定候选人独立实践泌尿外科能力的一种可接受的方式时,只有8/14(57.1%)的考官和15/24(62.5%)的考生表示同意。结论:这项研究表明,当使用模拟欧安组织的电话会议形式时,考官和候选人的总体满意度都很高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Virtual OSCE examinations during COVID-19 A 360 satisfaction assessment from examiners and candidates.

Introduction: We sought to determine the satisfaction rates of examiners and candidates in a virtual Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) of graduating Canadian urology residents.

Methods: An annual mock exam, aimed at simulating the licencing urology exam for Canadian graduates, was moved to an online format for the 2020 cohort. This exam consists of an OSCE, and a written multiple-choice exam. The Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ), a previously validated tool for clinical encounters with three sub-domains (quality of care provided, similarity to face-to-face encounter, and perception of the interaction) was modified for the purposes of evaluating the OSCE encounter. The TSQ was sent electronically to all examiners and candidates after the exam.

Results: There were 14/16 responses from examiners (87.5%) and 24/39 responses from candidates (61.5%). Overall, the format was judged to be a good experience by 13/14 (92.9%) of examiners and 21/24 (87.5%) of candidates; however, when asked specifically if the virtual OSCE was an acceptable way to determine a candidate's competency to practice urology independently, only 8/14 (57.1%) of examiners and 15/24 (62.5%) of candidates agreed.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates an overall good satisfaction rate among both examiners and candidates when using a teleconference format for a mock OSCE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Treatment modalities for small-sized urolithiases and their impact on health-related quality of life. Pilot study to assess the feasibility of self-administered, low-dose methoxyflurane for cystoscopic procedures. An analysis of benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical treatment reimbursement trends across Canada: Examining provincial changes over the recent decade with comparison to cost of living changes. Restricted access and advanced disease in post-pandemic testicular cancer. Comparison of outcomes in patients with and without neurologic diseases undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1