Design, validation and dissemination of an undergraduate assessment tool using SimMan® in simulated medical emergencies

Background: Increasingly, medical students are being taught acute medicine using whole-body simulator manikins. Aim: We aimed to design, validate and make widely available two simple assessment tools to be used with Laerdal SimMan (R) for final year students. Methods: We designed two scenarios with criterion-based checklists focused on assessment and management of two medical emergencies. Members of faculty critiqued the assessments for face validity and checklists revised. We assessed three groups of different experience levels: Foundation Year 2 doctors, third and final year medical students. Differences between groups were analysed, and internal consistency and interrater reliability calculated. A generalisability analysis was conducted using scenario and rater as facets in design. Results: A maximum of two items were removed from either checklist following the initial survey. Significantly different scores for three groups of experience for both scenarios were reported (p0.90). Internal consistency was poor (alpha<50.5). Generalizability study results suggest that four cases would provide reliable discrimination between final year students. Conclusions: These assessments proved easy to administer and we have gone some way to demonstrating construct validity and reliability. We have made the material available on a simulator website to enable others to reproduce these assessments

Predicting success in graduate entry medical students undertaking a graduate entry medical program (GEM)

Background: Success in undergraduate medical courses in the UK can be predicted by school exit examination (A level) grades. There are no documented predictors of success in UK graduate entry medicine (GEM) courses. This study looks at the examination performance of GEM students to identify factors which may predict success; of particular interest was A level score. Methods: Data was collected for students graduating in 2004, 2005 and 2006, including demographic details (age and gender), details of previous academic achievement (A level total score and prior degree) and examination results at several points during the degree course. Results: Study group comprised 285 students. Statistical analyses identified no significant variables when looking at clinical examinations. Analysis of pass/fail data for written examinations showed no relationship with A level score. However, both percentage data for the final written examination and the analysis of the award of honours showed A level scores of AAB or higher were associated with better performance (p < 0.001). Discussion: A prime objective of introducing GEM programs was to diversify admissions to medical school. In trying to achieve this, medical schools have changed selection criteria. The findings in this study justify this by proving that A level score was not associated with success in either clinical examinations or passing written examinations. Despite this, very high achievements at A level do predict high achievement during medical school. Conclusions: This study shows that selecting graduate medical students with the basic requirement of an upper-second class honours degree is justifiable and does not disadvantage students who may not have achieved high scores in school leaver examinations

Evidence-based medicine and values-based medicine : partners in clinical education as well as in clinical practice

The best clinical decisions are based on both evidence and values in what is known as the ‘twofeet principle’. Anecdotally, educationalists find teaching clinicians to become more evidence based is relatively simple in comparison to encouraging them to become more values based. One reason is likely to be the importance of values awareness. As valuesbased practice is premised on a mutual respect for the diversity of values, clinicians need to develop the skills to ascertain patient values and to get in touch with their own beliefs and preferences in order to understand those at play in any consultation. Only then can shared decision-making processes take place within a shared framework of values. In a research article published in BMC Medicine, AltamiranoBustamante and colleagues highlight difficulties that clinicians face in getting in touch with their own values. Despite finding that healthcare personnel’s core values were honesty and respect, autonomy was initially low ranked by participants. One significant aspect of this work is that this group has demonstrated that the extent to which clinicians value ‘autonomy’ and ‘openness to change’ can both be positively influenced by well designed education