Analyzing and comparing the results of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), in-group evaluation and final improvement examination of neurosurgical assistants of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in 2009-2010

Introduction: Assessment tools of academic achievement in the field of surgery have always been received considerable attention. The issue that has received less attention is that which one of these methods has higher efficiency to cover appropriately educational objectives in surgical groups. This survey aimed to evaluate the results of three examinations (including OSCE, in-group educational assessment, final improvement examination) of neurosurgical assistants of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in 2009-2010. Methods:In this retrospective cross-sectional study, results of examinations (OSCE, the annual improvement examination and in-group educational assessment) of neurosurgical assistants of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences were investigated. Scores from all three tests were extracted and analyzed. The 1-4 academic -years' scores of 15 individuals from 18 residents were analyzed. Results: The results of these exams showed that there is a significant difference between the scores in OSCE, the annual improvement examination and in-group educational assessment. This difference for the results of in-group exam was significant in comparison with the two other exams (p=0.000), but the results did not show significant difference (p=0.21) for annual improvement examination in comparison with OSCE. In addition, high grade residents’ score in OSCE and in-group was somehow similar and their mean rank was close together. But their scores in in-group exams showed considerable difference. Conclusion: Although annual improvement examination will be held as MCQ, and measures scientific and cognitive assistants’ ability and OSCE essentially assess psychomotor capabilities, but accurate planning and applying the MCQ is effective on its result. Holding annual improvement examination as focused, its proper conducting by Medical Education Development Center, participating all professors in designing questions, proper questions distributing of all references, applying two axes table tables for designing questions, its quality, adherence to the principles of designing question, using more than 70 percent questions in the taxonomy of two or three are factors which are effective for closing this test to the standard tests and making an accepted tests for assessing academic progress and differentiating assistants.