Background: Clinical clerkship in a busy hospital environment forms an important part of undergraduate medical training. Regular objective assessment of this activity with feedback would be expected to improve outcome. Methods: We implemented fortnightly clinical assessments using modified OSLER (Objective Structured Long Examination Record), and over a 6-week clinical rotation. Modifications included provision of individualized feedback. The assessment process was evaluated by both students and teachers via a questionnaire measuring their perceived educational impact, feasibility and acceptability. Results: Students agreed that the patient spectrum was appropriate and fair, resulting in improved history taking and presentation skills (96.6%), clinical examination skills (89%) and clinical reasoning skills (90.7%). It was graded to have helped learning “tremendously” and “moderately” by 64.7% and 32.8% of students respectively. Perceived improvement was attributable mainly to the repetitive nature of the assessments since only 63% of students were provided with feedback. 96.6% of students and 94.1% of assessors perceived the format created a stressful but positive learning environment. 52.9% of assessors agreed that the exercise consumed significant time and resources but 88.2% rated it as manageable and supported its continuation. Conclusion: Frequent and regular in-course clinical assessments with emphasis on individual feedback is feasible, acceptable and has significant positive educational impact.

Cardiac Catheterization ; instrumentation ; methods ; Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional ; instrumentation ; methods ; Heart Valve Prosthesis ; adverse effects ; Hemodynamics ; Humans ; Hypertension, Pulmonary ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Mitral Valve ; pathology ; Mitral Valve Insufficiency ; pathology ; therapy

Realising possible unmet needs of final year medical students we initiated a weekly informal face-toface discussion forum between them and the teaching faculty of the department of medicine. Various academic and non-academic topics, as dictated by the students, were discussed in 19 weekly sessions. Evaluation by the students was subsequently done by means of an on-line questionnaire after the final examinations. The aim of this study was to evaluate this forum, undertaken for the first time in our institution, by assessing student feedback. We conclude that although the number of attendees and responders were small, feedback was generally positive. This type of forum can be improved upon and serve as another portal for benefitting students.