Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Contents:

Information:

  • Access
  • Open access

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        CASC candidates need better preparation
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        CASC candidates need better preparation
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        CASC candidates need better preparation
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

Kashyap & Sule are right to express outrage at the low pass rates for the Royal College of Psychiatrists Clinical Assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC), and concern over the difference between UK-trained candidates and those trained elsewhere. 1 They offer good suggestions for improvement. However, by focusing on the examination itself rather than the quality of CASC preparation in UK postgraduate training programmes, their outrage may be misdirected.

The validity and reliability of multistation Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) has been tentatively established. 2 Despite the appeal of the long-case examination, it has poor interrater and test-retest reliability when system-atically evaluated; 3 its continued use in high-stakes professional examinations is difficult to justify. However, it is very concerning that many candidates are surprised when failing a supposedly objective examination after 3 years of practising psychiatry. Can it be that so many intelligent and diligent psychiatry residents have a severe lack of insight into their own abilities? This seems implausible. It is more likely that postgraduate training programmes are failing to equip residents with the skills they need to pass the CASC. Given that these are predominantly consultation and interpersonal skills, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that residents receive inadequate feedback on clinical skills in their initial years of practice, even before commencing formal preparation for the CASC.

The College dropping the Part 1 OSCE shifted responsibility for evaluating first-year residents’ core clinical skills to postgraduate training programmes by means of the workplace-based assessment (WPBA) system. This approach is not effective: there are multiple flaws in the current WPBA system 4 and its suitability for assessing and developing core clinical skills is even more questionable than the long-case examination. 5 These observations are supported by our own experience of delivering CASC training: many candidates are surprised to receive in-depth feedback on difficulties in interpersonal and consultation style. After 3 years of practising psychiatry to their best of their ability with little criticism or coaching, it is no wonder that they are disappointed when the first piece of negative feedback they receive is failing the CASC. This affects UK-trained and non-UK-trained candidates alike and to focus on discrepancies detracts from the issue that the current pass rate is too low for all candidates.

This leads us to the conclusion that a substantial share of responsibility for low CASC pass rates lies not with the Royal College of Psychiatrists, but with the postgraduate training programmes. It is of course important that the CASC is continuously evaluated and improved, but there are more pressing issues. First, we suggest that training programme directors collect and publish data on CASC pass rates and urgently improve support and training for residents at risk of failing. Second, preparation for the CASC must start in the first year of psychiatric practice, in the form of in-depth consultation skills training beyond the WPBA system. Finally, we recommend that current and prospective psychiatry residents use all available information regarding the quality of clinical skills and CASC training when choosing a postgraduate training programme.

1 Kashyap, G, Sule, A. MRCPsych CASC exam: is there a better choice? Psychiatrist 2012; 36: 197.
2 Hodges, BD, Regehr, G, Hanson, M. Validation of an objective structured clinical examination in psychiatry. Acad Med 1998; 73: 910–2.
3 Leichner, P, Sisler, GC, Harper, D. A study of the reliability of the clinical oral examination in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry 1984; 29: 394–7.
4 Menon, S, Winston, M, Sullivan, G. Workplace-based assessment: attitudes and perceptions among consultant trainers and comparison with those of trainees. Psychiatrist 2012; 36: 1624.
5 Kahn, MJ, Merrill, WW, Anderson, DS, Szerlip, HM. Residency program director evaluations do not correlate with performance on a required 4th-year objective structured clinical examination. Teach Learn Med 2001; 13: 912.