Medical Education
Conditions
Brief summary
Abstract Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) are vital for assessing nursing competence. However, the design of OSCE stations, particularly comparing critical (high-stakes) versus routine (low-stakes) scenarios, may differentially impact student stress and clinical performance. This experimental study compared these effects to inform the optimal design of assessments. Methods: This 2024 experimental study at Torbat Heydariyeh University randomly assigned 78 final-year nursing students to two groups (n=39 each). The Intervention Group faced a critical CPR station where failure resulted in exam disqualification, while the Control Group faced a standard routine station. Both groups received identical Basic Life Support (BLS) training in accordance with the 2020 AHA guidelines. Outcomes were assessed using: (a) the PSS-10 stress scale (α=0.85); (b) a 20-item BLS knowledge test; and (c) a 17-item CPR skills checklist, with performance metrics (depth, rate, ventilation) recorded objectively by a Laerdal QCPR® manikin. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests and the Mann-Whitney test to achieve 80% power.
Interventions
OTHERHigh-Stake OSCE
In this intervention, students had to pass more challenging OSCE in comparison with contol-group
Sponsors
Torbat Heydariyeh University of Medical Sciences
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* The inclusion criteria included nursing students in their eighth semester who had given their consent to participate in the study
Exclusion criteria
*
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Stress of students in OSCE exam | 1 day | stress of students was measured by pss-10 questionnaire Stress levels were quantified using the Persian version of PSS-10 (α=0.85), administered via OSCE. |
| BLS knowledge | 1 day | Basic life support knowledge To assess students' knowledge and clinical reasoning in mechanical ventilation, a researcher-developed, mixed-format questionnaire was used. The tool included 20 items such as multiple-choice questions, clinical scenarios, calculation-based items (e.g., RSBI, ventilator settings), and graphic interpretation tasks. Content areas covered ventilator modes, complications, alarm settings, ABG analysis, and weaning criteria, designed in alignment with recent guidelines including the American Heart Association (2023). Content validity was confirmed by six experts in critical care and nursing education (CVI ≥ 0.8). A pilot test with 30 final-year students demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α= 0.84). The questionnaire was administered before and after the intervention in both study groups to evaluate learning outcomes. |
Countries
Iran
Outcome results
None listed