I went to a state practical exam today for students who had finished their class about a month ago. The session was held at a suburban campus for the training center... The examiners were various instructors and I think the state sent over a chief examiner to coordinate everything. There were about 50 candidates. I came to be a patient...
I have a few observations. I am in the middle of my class now, and while we have not done splinting or backboarding, I have learned in the past. As a "patient" I am not allowed to help candidates at all, but am but into numerous situations where I do subconsciously. For example, when the examiner says I have an ulna fracture, I raise my arm to the proper position, etc.
I was very surprised at both the lack of technical skills and ability to read off protocols of the candidates. I know that I am going to be taking the test in about two months-- am I going to be that bad? I hope now that I have seen it I can prepare better.
I was a patient for every station but CPR (splinting/bandaging, backboarding, pt assesment). Here is my analysis of each:
Splinting/bandaging:
I see those skills as purely technical with slight variation based on the patient. Some candidates were better then others and I was unable to get any read from the examiners as to who passed and who did not. Many of the candidates were fumbling with the equipment either due to not knowing that brand or incompetence. I assumed the latter. To my surprise, nobody forgot BSI/Scene Safety.
Backboarding-- again, I had trouble reading whether candidates passed or not. I see that the time offered to examine and prep equipment is invaluable, two of the candidates messed up because straps were in the wrong place, another because a buckle was missing. If they had pointed that out before starting, it would have been fine, but because they missed it, they were docked points. I wondered if the examiner had stuck the broken strap in to see if it would be caught. Being KED boarded is an interesting experience, I forgot how "restrictive" it is.
Pt Evaluation-- this is where I saw candidates REALLY mess up. To me, it seems simple enough to memorize steps and adapt them to the situation. Recently, I have had a lot of practice with assessment, and that may be why I am so critical. The candidates are given two fairly simple scenarios--one a trauma (Y/A thrown 20 feet from a MVA, the second, medical, is an elderly man with emphysema with difficulty breathing.
On both of the scenarios, the candidates did their work completely out of order, causing them to miss big things and include unnecessary elements (like checking for tramatic bleeding on the medical pt, or forgetting both c-spine stabilization and baseline vitals on the trauma pt).
I do worry that some of these candidates passed (is that wrong?) I guess it's wishful thinking, but I thought I could have done better under the circumstances. Is this the trend for state exams? Are candidates always this inept? Am I judging them too harshly? Please weigh in, I am curious.
DES
I have a few observations. I am in the middle of my class now, and while we have not done splinting or backboarding, I have learned in the past. As a "patient" I am not allowed to help candidates at all, but am but into numerous situations where I do subconsciously. For example, when the examiner says I have an ulna fracture, I raise my arm to the proper position, etc.
I was very surprised at both the lack of technical skills and ability to read off protocols of the candidates. I know that I am going to be taking the test in about two months-- am I going to be that bad? I hope now that I have seen it I can prepare better.
I was a patient for every station but CPR (splinting/bandaging, backboarding, pt assesment). Here is my analysis of each:
Splinting/bandaging:
I see those skills as purely technical with slight variation based on the patient. Some candidates were better then others and I was unable to get any read from the examiners as to who passed and who did not. Many of the candidates were fumbling with the equipment either due to not knowing that brand or incompetence. I assumed the latter. To my surprise, nobody forgot BSI/Scene Safety.
Backboarding-- again, I had trouble reading whether candidates passed or not. I see that the time offered to examine and prep equipment is invaluable, two of the candidates messed up because straps were in the wrong place, another because a buckle was missing. If they had pointed that out before starting, it would have been fine, but because they missed it, they were docked points. I wondered if the examiner had stuck the broken strap in to see if it would be caught. Being KED boarded is an interesting experience, I forgot how "restrictive" it is.
Pt Evaluation-- this is where I saw candidates REALLY mess up. To me, it seems simple enough to memorize steps and adapt them to the situation. Recently, I have had a lot of practice with assessment, and that may be why I am so critical. The candidates are given two fairly simple scenarios--one a trauma (Y/A thrown 20 feet from a MVA, the second, medical, is an elderly man with emphysema with difficulty breathing.
On both of the scenarios, the candidates did their work completely out of order, causing them to miss big things and include unnecessary elements (like checking for tramatic bleeding on the medical pt, or forgetting both c-spine stabilization and baseline vitals on the trauma pt).
I do worry that some of these candidates passed (is that wrong?) I guess it's wishful thinking, but I thought I could have done better under the circumstances. Is this the trend for state exams? Are candidates always this inept? Am I judging them too harshly? Please weigh in, I am curious.
DES
