TY - JOUR
T1 - Objective structured clinical examination vs traditional clinical examination to evaluate students' clinical competence
T2 - A systematic review of nursing faculty and students' perceptions and experiences
AU - Vincent, Sophia Cyril
AU - Arulappan, Judie
AU - Amirtharaj, Anandhi
AU - Matua, Gerald Amandu
AU - Al Hashmi, Iman
N1 - Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - Background: Assessment of clinical competence of nursing students is an essential requirement in professional nursing education. This article summarizes the current published evidence indicating the nursing faculty and students' perceptions and experiences on benefits of OSCE over TCE. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, Science Direct, CINAHL, EBSCO, PsychINFO, and Pubmed Central were used to identify relevant articles. The studies published between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020 and fourteen full-text articles that met all the inclusion criteria were included in the review. Results: The review identified five themes namely: a) Student's perception of OSCE; b) student's satisfaction regarding OSCE as an examination approach; c) students' perception of TCE as an examination approach; d) student's level of stress and anxiety towards OSCE vs TCE; and e) faculty member's perception and experience of OSCE. Conclusion: We conclude that OSCE is a more credible assessment format to evaluate the clinical competence of undergraduate nursing students compared to the TCE method.
AB - Background: Assessment of clinical competence of nursing students is an essential requirement in professional nursing education. This article summarizes the current published evidence indicating the nursing faculty and students' perceptions and experiences on benefits of OSCE over TCE. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Electronic databases including Scopus, Medline, Science Direct, CINAHL, EBSCO, PsychINFO, and Pubmed Central were used to identify relevant articles. The studies published between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020 and fourteen full-text articles that met all the inclusion criteria were included in the review. Results: The review identified five themes namely: a) Student's perception of OSCE; b) student's satisfaction regarding OSCE as an examination approach; c) students' perception of TCE as an examination approach; d) student's level of stress and anxiety towards OSCE vs TCE; and e) faculty member's perception and experience of OSCE. Conclusion: We conclude that OSCE is a more credible assessment format to evaluate the clinical competence of undergraduate nursing students compared to the TCE method.
KW - Clinical competence
KW - Nursing faculty
KW - OSCE
KW - Traditional clinical examination
KW - Undergraduate nursing students
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117352673&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85117352673&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/2b7ae7e9-009e-391b-9f33-e80ba80f0f19/
U2 - 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105170
DO - 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105170
M3 - Review article
C2 - 34678667
AN - SCOPUS:85117352673
SN - 0260-6917
VL - 108
JO - Nurse Education Today
JF - Nurse Education Today
M1 - 105170
ER -