ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2592

Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Objective Structured Clinical Examination : An Assessment of the Test

Eugene Y. Kissin1, Peter C. Grayson2, Amy C. Cannella3, Amy M. Evangelisto4, Janak R. Goyal5, Rany Al Haj6, Jay B. Higgs7, Daniel G. Malone8, Midori Jane Nishio9, Darren Tabechian10 and Gurjit S. Kaeley11, 1Rheumatology, Boston University, Boston, MA, 2Section of Rheumatology & the Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, Vasculitis Center, Boston, MA, 3Divison of Rheumatology, University of Nebraska Med Ctr, Omaha, NE, 4Arthritis, Rheumatic and Back Disease Associates, Voorhees, NJ, 5Medicine, Raritan Bay Medical Center, Perth Amboy, NJ, 6Rheumatology, Shore Arthritis & Rheumatism Associates, Ocean, NJ, 7Rheumatology, San Antonio Military Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, TX, 8Family & Sports Orthopaedic Center, Beaver Dam, WI, 9Diablo Clinical Research, Walnut Creek, CA, 10Allergy/Immun/Rheumatology, Univ of Rochester Schl of Med, Rochester, NY, 11University of Florida, Ponte Vedra Beach, FL

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Education, medical, musculoskeletal disorders, statistical methods and ultrasound

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Medical Education

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose:

There is debate about whether an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) should be part of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) competency testing in MSUS, and the reliability and validity of this approach has not been established. We aim to determine the reliability and validity of an OSCE for MSUS.

 Methods:

A 9-station OSCE was administered to a group of 35 rheumatology fellows, following an 8 month training program in MSUS, and to 3 expert faculty members as a control group. The participants were unaware of whether the joints were abnormal (n=5; wrist, ankle, elbow, finger, toe) or normal (n=4; wrist, ankle, knee, shoulder). Expert faculty in MSUS (n=9) graded image quality at OSCE stations using a predefined checklist and global rating (0-5 scale where 2 is barely passing) as both proctors and assessors. At each station a proctor witnessed and graded the studies being performed. Later, each resulting ultrasound image was also graded by two assessors blinded to who performed the study. Identical assessors graded the normal and abnormal wrist and ankle stations. Inter-rater reliability for assessors and proctors was estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The borderline group method was used to set the overall passing score. A summative, 76 item multiple choice test (MCQ) assessed fellow knowledge necessary to interpret ultrasound images. Correlation between MCQ and OSCE performance (concurrent validity) was assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Construct validity was established by comparing fellow OSCE results with that of the faculty (gold standard). 

Results:

Reliability

Inter-rater reliability was good (ICC=0.7) between the assessors, but was poor (ICC=0.3) between the assessors and the proctors. Reliability of the assessor scores was good in the normal wrist and ankle stations (ICC=0.7), and moderate in the abnormal wrist and ankle stations (ICC=0.4). 

Validity

MCQ grades correlated strongly with OSCE grades from both the assessors (r=0.52; p=<0.01) and from the proctors (r=0.58; p<0.01). The average MCQ score for the 5 fellows who failed the OSCE was less than that for the 30 who passed (60% vs. 71%, p= 0.04, Wilcoxon rank sum).

The fellows in the bottom quartile of the MCQ scored 3.07 on the OSCE, significantly worse than the top quartile fellows (3.32), and the faculty (3.29) (p<0.01, Wilcoxon signed rank). Scores also significantly discriminated bottom quartile fellows from faculty in the normal wrist and ankle stations (3.38 vs. 3.78, p<0.01), but not in the abnormal stations (3.37 vs. 3.49, p=0.08).

Conclusion:

MSUS OSCE is a reliable and valid method for evaluation of MSUS skill when assessed by blinded examiners. Proctor grading is less reliable and adds to the cost of a practical MSUS examination. Normal joint assessment stations are more reliable than abnormal joint assessment stations and better discriminate poorly performing fellows from faculty, likely because assessors are less certain about the optimal appearance of abnormal joints and have more difficulty accurately scoring the resulting images.


Disclosure:

E. Y. Kissin,
None;

P. C. Grayson,
None;

A. C. Cannella,
None;

A. M. Evangelisto,
None;

J. R. Goyal,
None;

R. Al Haj,
None;

J. B. Higgs,
None;

D. G. Malone,
None;

M. J. Nishio,
None;

D. Tabechian,
None;

G. S. Kaeley,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/musculoskeletal-ultrasound-objective-structured-clinical-examination-an-assessment-of-the-test/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology