Feasibility and Effectiveness of Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) in an Undergraduate Medical Program: A Study From Pakistan
Shameel Shafqat,Isbaah Tejani,Muhammad Ali,Hemaila Tariq,Saniya Sabzwari
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.29563
2022-09-25
Cureus
Abstract:Background In clinical settings, direct observation (DO) with feedback is an effective method to assess and improve learner performance. One tool used for DO is the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (Mini-CEX). We conducted a study to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of Mini-CEX for medical students at Aga Khan University, Karachi. Methods Utilizing a purposive sampling technique, a total of 199 students in six core clerkships of Years 3 and 4 were selected for this study. Participating faculty underwent training workshops for use of Mini-CEX and feedback strategies. Each student was assessed twice by one faculty, using a modified version of the Mini-CEX, which assessed four domains of clinical skills: Data Gathering, Communication, Diagnosis/Differential, and Management Plan and Organization. Feedback was given after each encounter. Faculty and students also provided detailed feedback regarding the process of DO. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), with categorical variables arranged as frequencies and percentages. The Chi-squared test was used for further statistical analyses, and a P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Effectiveness was assessed via a change in student performance between the first and second Mini-CEX, and feasibility was assessed via qualitative feedback. Results We obtained three sets of results: Mini-CEX forms (523), from which we included a total 350 evaluations for analysis, 216 from Year 3 and 134 from Year 4, and feedback on DO: student (70) and faculty (18). Year 3 students performed significantly better in all foci of the Mini-CEX between the first and second assessment (P ≤ 0.001), whereas in Year 4, significant improvement was limited to only two domains of the Mini-CEX [Communication of History/Physical Examination (P = 0.040) and Diagnosis/Differential and Management Plan (P < 0.001)]. Students (65.7%) and faculty (94.4%) felt this exercise improved their interaction. 83.3% faculty recommended its formal implementation compared to 27.1% of students, who reported challenges in implementation of the Mini-CEX such as time constraints, logistics, the subjectivity of assessment, and varying interest by faculty. Conclusion Direct observation using Mini-CEX is effective in improving the clinical and diagnostic skills of medical students and strengthens student-faculty interaction. While challenges exist in its implementation, the strategic placement of Mini-CEX may enhance its utility in measuring student competency.