Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology
Year:2007 | Volume:13 | Issue:1 (48)|Papers Count:11

Objectives: This study aimed at reviewing how the first Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in psychiatry was conducted and at assessing appreciation of this method by the residents, consultants, and standardized patients (SPs) compared to the current psychiatry oral exams.Method: A total of 22 psychiatry residents of final year were tested in 9 stations in the presence of 8 standardized patients and a conclusion station. Each station took 12 minutes. Two consultants rated the residents separately in each station based on the designed scoring tables. After the exam, consultants, residents and standardized patients were assessed by questionnaires. This assessment was repeated three weeks later and immediately after the oral board exam from the same residents.Results: Residents described timing of the stations, information given before the exam, and capability of the OSCE in assessing competence of the residents as fair and appropriate. Seventy-five percent of the residents were happy to have participated in this exam.Most of them described the current oral board exam as not fair, not objective and even not similar to the actual clinical settings. Rater consultants also described the goals of the stations, timing, and performance of SPs as appropriate. SPs were happy to participate in this experience again too.Conclusion: Holding a satisfactory and accurate OSCE receives approval of the participants (residents), raters (consultants), and SPs.

Objectives: The psychiatric OSCE was experimentally conducted for the first time in Iran at the level of subspecialties in August 2004. We aimed to qualitatively evaluate the attending professors' and psychiatry residents' viewpoints in order to understand the advantages, deficiencies, difficulties and suggestions of professors and residents in this regard.Method: In this qualitative study, focused group discussion method of the attending professors and psychiatry residents participating in this test was used on the day of testing. Two focused group discussion sessions were conducted each including 8-10 participants. Results: According to attending professors and psychiatry residents, fairness was the most significant advantage of OSCE. The most important failure of OSCE, according to psychiatry residents, was being artificial in the station environment and lack of an appropriate rapport with the unreal patient. Attending professors pointed out that OSCE is pretty time-consuming and costly. Main suggestions they offered for optimization of OSCE included further training of standard patients as well as displaying already prepared movies from real patients in some of stations.Conclusion: In professors' and residents' point of view, psychiatric OSCE has significant advantages over current testing for psychiatric residents. However, providing a successful OSCE in the upcoming years requires that the aforementioned problems be cleared by further training of standard patients and applying other suggestions cited by the professors and residents.

Objectives: This study aims at the evaluation of validity and reliability of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in psychiatry and among the residents.Method: Following assessments and a lot of discussions among all consultant psychiatrists in the country, nine 12-minute stations were designed. In each station, two examining raters completed the previously designed checklists individually. Standardized patients were used in 8 of the stations. Face and content validity, construct validity, concurrent validity and inter-rater reliability, internal consistency and inter-station reliability were all assessed.Results: Face and content validity of the test was reached after holding sessions with the presence of the consultants and chair of the country's specialty board and also providing all practical goals while discussing them in different group meetings. Concurrent validity was evaluated after comparing OSCE scores for both the residents and their own consultants. Concurrent validity was assessed through evaluating correlation of OSCE scores with results of oral and written board exams, competency exams, and psychiatry entry exam, which actually showed an appropriate validity for this test. Assessment of test reliability using the inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and inter-station reliability displayed an appropriate reliability for this OSCE.Conclusion: The first psychiatry OSCE had significant validity and reliability.

Objectives: The increasing use of standardized patients in the psychiatric Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) promoted the investigators to explore the viewpoints of examining professors and participating psychiatric residents towards the performance of the standardized patients.Method: In an OSCE, 22 of the final year psychiatric residents and 16 examiners participated in our study. Performance of the 8 standardized patients in all 8 stations was evaluated after the test.Results: This study showed acceptable and appropriate performance of standardized patients both in acting according to and in actualizing the scenarios.Conclusion: Use of standardized patients in psychiatric OSCE is recommended by the examining professors and also residents.

Objectives: This study aims to compare viewpoints of standardized patients (SPs) and consultant psychiatrists about the performance of volunteer residents in the first Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in Iran.Method: OSCE was hold with 9 stations and 8 SPs, in one day with attendance of 22 senior psychiatric residents. In each station two raters independently scored the residents based on a previously prepared checklist. SPs were three females and five males with the mean age of 27 years. In the end, viewpoints of consultant psychiatrists and SPs on the performance of residents were compared.Results: Beside three stations, no significant correlation between SPs' and consultants' opinions could be found in other stations. SPs in the stations with significant correlation had higher level of education especially in the psychiatry-relevant fields.Conclusion: Despite capabilities of tile SPs, it is probably not reasonable to rely on their opinion as raters unless they have higher level of education.

Objectives: Few reports are available regarding the use of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) for the evaluation of psychiatry residents. Assessing their attitudes towards this method of testing has been the aim of this study.Method: Forty psychiatry residents from all universities in Iran who were selected on a stratified sampling method participated in the third comprehensive pilot OSCE in Iran. After the exam, viewpoints were canvassed using a questionnaire and also face to face interview. Data were then analyzed using descriptive statistical methods. Results: Ninety percent of residents believed that the simulations and scenarios were quite realistic and 97.5% considered the scenarios reflective of clinical situations they usually experience. Most of the residents believed also such an examination could discriminate competent and incompetent residents successfully. Eighty percent of the residents believed that OSCE is superior than the oral board examination and 87.5% felt they would like the experience to be a formative part of their residency training.Conclusion: The oral or practical board examination can be replaced by OSCE.

Objectives: Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is used for comprehensive exams for the residents and board of specialists in psychiatry. In a guided survey performed by Iran, Tehran, and Isfahan Universities of Medical Sciences in the Behavioral Sciences Research Center (BSRC) in Isfahan, validity and reliability of OSCE in psychiatry were evaluated as well as familiarizing psychiatry residents and consultants with it.Method: The study was conducted to measure the validity and reliability of OSCE in psychiatry autumn, 2005 in BSRC in Isfahan.A 3-day workshop was therefore held, in which 22 consultant psychiatrist and 22 psychiatry residents participated and 6 lO-minute stations were also designed. To assess validity, face validity method and to assess reliability, inter-station reliability and internal consistency, contingency coefficient and parallel reliability were used.Results: The mean of checklist total scores for the residents was 84.28 (standard deviation=11.91). Agreement coefficient between the raters' scores(in all 6 stations)was 0.96 with the correlation coefficient of 0.82. Pearson correlation coefficient between checklist scores and the global score was calculated as r=0.89 (p<0.001). Test validity was at a very good level.Conclusion: Oral examination of OSCE in psychiatry is feasible for residents in this field and bears appropriate validity and reliability.

Objectives: The purpose of the present study has been assessing life satisfaction as an indicator of positive attitude towards life.Method: Multidimensional Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (MSLSS) was used for 200 high school students (100 boys and 100 girls) with three educational field of study: mathematics, science, and humanities in districts three and five of Isfahan city. They were selected on a randomized multi-stage cluster sampling. Data were then analyzed using t-test, Pearson correlation coefficient, one-way analysis of variance, and factor analysis.Results: Cronbach's Alpha in all subjects, male students, and female students were 0.863, 0.844 and 0.884 respectively. Furthermore, the reliability of the instrument was considered acceptable for the educational districts (of three and five) as well as among the three educational study fields (mathematics, science, and humanities).Reliability of five research subscales: friends, self, school, family, and living environment were also reported as acceptable. Factor analysis indicated that items of instrument could be reduced to five factors reflecting construct validity.Conclusion: This scale can be used as a reliable measure in the high school students in Isfaban.