Can Different Admissions to Medical School Predict Performance of Non-Technical Skill Performance in Simulated Clinical Settings?

Non-technical skills (NTS) in medical care are essential to ensure patient safety. Focussing on applicants' NTS during medical school admission could be a promising approach to ensure that future physicians master NTS at a high level. Next to pre-university educational attainment, many selection tests have been developed worldwide to facilitate and standardise the selection process of medical students. The predictive validity of these tests regarding NTS performance in clinical settings has not been investigated (yet). Therefore, we explored the predictive validities and prognosis of the Hamburg MMI (HAM-Int), HAM-Nat, PEA, and waiting as well as other quota (as example) designated by the Federal Armed Forces) for NTS performance in clinical emergency medicine training of medical students. During 2017 and 2020, N = 729 second, third, and fourth year students were enrolled within the study. The mean age of participants was 26.68 years (SD 3.96) and 49% were female students. NTS of these students were assessed during simulation scenarios of emergency training with a validated rating tool. Students admitted via waiting quota and designated by the Armed Forces performed significantly better than students admitted by excellent PEA (p = 0.026). Non-EU students performed significantly inferior (p = 0.003). Our findings provide further insight to explain how and if admission to medical school could predict NTS performance of further physicians.

Automated summary

Non-technical skills (NTS) play a crucial role in ensuring patient safety in medical care. Focusing on assessing applicants' NTS during medical school admission may be a promising approach to ensure that future physicians possess high-level NTS. This study investigated the predictive validity of various selection tests and admission criteria for NTS performance in clinical emergency medicine training among medical students.