Scholarlink

Background <p>Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) translate competency domains into observable clinical tasks and support workplace-based assessment in undergraduate Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS). This study aimed to develop a context-specific set of OMFS EPAs for final-year BDS students and evaluate their quality and reliability using the Queen’s EQual rubric.</p> Methods <p>A consensus-generating mixed-methods design was employed using a purposive expert panel (<i>n</i> = 10). The Nominal Group Technique was used to generate and prioritise EPAs, followed by structured rating on a 5-point Likert scale and iterative refinement. EPA quality was evaluated using the 14-item EQual rubric. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha, generalizability theory (phi coefficient), and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).</p> Results <p>Ten experts (60% male; five specialists, four general dentists, and one medical educationist) completed all study phases. Ten EPAs were developed. The highest consensus (9/10) was achieved for history-taking, diagnostic testing and imaging, informed consent, and non-surgical care, whereas lower consensus was observed for preventive and follow-up care (3/10) and orofacial pain and anxiety management (4/10). Most EPAs (8/10) were judged by a majority as not requiring revision; however, the EPAs addressing orofacial pain and anxiety management and preventive and follow-up care were most frequently identified for refinement (<i>n</i> ≥ 6; mean ratings 3.60 and 3.40, respectively). All EPAs exceeded the predefined EQual cut score (4.07), with overall mean scores ranging from 4.26 to 4.41 (SD 0.16–0.23) and high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89). Reliability evidence indicated excellent dependability (phi = 0.987 for specialists; 0.888 for general dentists) and strong inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.969 [95% CI 0.914–0.996] for specialists; 0.964 [0.900–0.996] for general dentists; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001).</p> Conclusions <p>A 10-item EPA framework for undergraduate OMFS demonstrated acceptable structural quality and strong reliability. Refinement priorities were identified for EPAs related to preventive and follow-up care and orofacial pain and anxiety management. This framework provides a structured basis for workplace-based assessment and curriculum alignment in undergraduate OMFS training.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Bridging competency gaps: developing entrustable professional activities for undergraduate oral and maxillofacial surgery training

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月24日

查看全文
  • Saima Siddiqui,
  • Sonia Ijaz Haider,
  • Rafey Ahmad Jameel,
  • Syed Jaffar Abbas Zaidi,
  • Saqif Nasir,
  • Saduq Fatimah

摘要

Background

Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) translate competency domains into observable clinical tasks and support workplace-based assessment in undergraduate Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS). This study aimed to develop a context-specific set of OMFS EPAs for final-year BDS students and evaluate their quality and reliability using the Queen’s EQual rubric.

Methods

A consensus-generating mixed-methods design was employed using a purposive expert panel (n = 10). The Nominal Group Technique was used to generate and prioritise EPAs, followed by structured rating on a 5-point Likert scale and iterative refinement. EPA quality was evaluated using the 14-item EQual rubric. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha, generalizability theory (phi coefficient), and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

Ten experts (60% male; five specialists, four general dentists, and one medical educationist) completed all study phases. Ten EPAs were developed. The highest consensus (9/10) was achieved for history-taking, diagnostic testing and imaging, informed consent, and non-surgical care, whereas lower consensus was observed for preventive and follow-up care (3/10) and orofacial pain and anxiety management (4/10). Most EPAs (8/10) were judged by a majority as not requiring revision; however, the EPAs addressing orofacial pain and anxiety management and preventive and follow-up care were most frequently identified for refinement (n ≥ 6; mean ratings 3.60 and 3.40, respectively). All EPAs exceeded the predefined EQual cut score (4.07), with overall mean scores ranging from 4.26 to 4.41 (SD 0.16–0.23) and high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89). Reliability evidence indicated excellent dependability (phi = 0.987 for specialists; 0.888 for general dentists) and strong inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.969 [95% CI 0.914–0.996] for specialists; 0.964 [0.900–0.996] for general dentists; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

A 10-item EPA framework for undergraduate OMFS demonstrated acceptable structural quality and strong reliability. Refinement priorities were identified for EPAs related to preventive and follow-up care and orofacial pain and anxiety management. This framework provides a structured basis for workplace-based assessment and curriculum alignment in undergraduate OMFS training.