Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What Should Be Included in a Peer Physical Examination Policy and Procedure?

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Medical schools around the world often use peer physical examination (PPE), which involves students examining each other, as part of their clinical skills training. However, no Australian medical school has a policy and accompanying procedure in place to address unexpected circumstances such as the discovery of an abnormality, inappropriate behaviour, breaches in confidentiality and students not wishing to examine fellow students. This paper suggests ideas for what a PPE policy and procedure may look like to address these concerns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wearn A, Vnuk A. Medical students and peer physical examination: two case studies of strategies to improve safety and increase acceptance. Focus Health Prof Educ Multidiscip J. 2005;7:88–98.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chang EH, Power DV. Are medical students comfortable with practicing physical examinations on each other? Acad Med. 2000;75:384–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Das M, Townsend A, Hasan MY. Should medical students act as surrogate patients for each other? Med Educ. 1998;32:143–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rees CE, Bradley P, Collett T, McLachlan JC. “Over my dead body?”: the influence of demographics on students’ willingness to participate in peer physical examination. Med Teach. 2005;27:599–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Power DV, Center BA. Examining the medical student body: peer physical exams and genital, rectal, or breast exams. Teach Learn Med. 2005;17:337–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Boendermaker PM, Pols J, Scherpbier AJJA. Unexpected pathological findings in skills training and assessing skills. Med Teach. 1999;21:586–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pols J, Boendermaker PM, Muntinghe H. Incidence of and sequels to medical problems discovered in medical students during study-related activities. Med Educ. 2003;37:889–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. O’Neill PA, Larcombe C, Duffy K, Dorman TL. Medical students’ willingness and reactions to learning basic skills through examining fellow students. Med Teach. 1998;20:433–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Koehler N, McMenamin C. The need for a peer physical examination policy within Australian medical schools. Med Teach. 2014;36:430–3. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.874551.

  10. Medical Deans Australia and New Zealand. Developing a national assessment blueprint for clinical competencies for the medical graduate (Competencies Project Stage 3) Final Report. March 2014.

Download references

Conflict of Interest

The authors report no declarations of interest. No funding was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Koehler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koehler, N., Currey, J. & McMenamin, C. What Should Be Included in a Peer Physical Examination Policy and Procedure?. Med.Sci.Educ. 24, 379–385 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-014-0068-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-014-0068-4

Keywords

Navigation