1 Report on EBEORL-Exams 2014 Klaus Albegger, Angelos Nikolau, Maria de la Mota UEMS Annual ORL – Section and Board Meeting Dubrovnik

2  Written Exam Antalya (124 Cand.)  Written Exam Warsaw (38 Cand.)  Preview Oral Exam Vienna (144 Cand.)  Written Exam Praha  Praha Workshop Round Table EBEORL  Review Meeting Vienna  E-learning Platform e-lefENT Cooperation  Future Project: ECE (European Certified Examiner) Topics

3 Mardan Palace Hotel 10th Congress of European Laryngological society (ELS)

4 Prof. Ferhan Öz, President of ELS Authorities of the Turkisch ENT Society Preparation of the exam

5 Preparation of the exam rooms and registration

6 124 Candidates for the written exam!!

1 Candidate Armenia Bahrein Ireland Nigeria Spain 2 Candidates Cyprus India Kuweit Pakistan Palestina Portugal UK Lebanon 3 Jordania 4 Egypt 6 Iraq 9 Syria 10 Saudi Arabia 25 Turkey Europe8 Non-Europe116 Nationality of 124 Candidates Written Exam Antalya 7

8

9 Results from the written Exam Antalya Candidates124 Passed112 (90 %) Failed12 (10 %) Notes range Anzahl 1 >902 (1.63%) 2 >8015 (12.2%) 3 >7060 (48.78%) 4 >6034 (27.64%) 5 <6012 (9.76%)

10 Distribution of PointsDifficulty

Refers to a statistical technique that helps instructors identify the effectiveness of their test items. In developing quality assessment and specifically effective multiple-choice test items, item analysis plays an important role in contributing to the fairness of the test along with identifying content areas that maybe problematic for the candidates. Item analysis b

Item Difficulty Discrimination Index Reliability of the Test = Crombach alpha Distractor Evaluation Proportion answering correctly

Example for an Exam Report: Difficulty

Discrimination Index b It is the difference between the proportion of the top scorers who got an item correct and the proportion of the bottom scorers who got the item right (each of these groups consists of about 33 % of the total group of candidates who took the test and is based on the candidates total score for the test). The discrimination index range is between -1 and +1. The closer the index is to +1, the more effectively the item distinguishes between the two groups of candidates.

16 Colleagues from Erbil (Kurdistan/Iraq)

Erbil 17

Warsaw

Dinner with Prof.Dr.Romuald Krajewski, President of UEMS 19

20

Prof.Dr. Kazimierz Niemczyk, Chairmen of the ENT-Department, Dean of the Medical Faculty 21

22 EU15 Non-EU23 Sum38 Candidates Nationality Written Exam Warsaw

23 1 Candidate Cyprus France Germany Iraq Ireland Kuweit Lebanon Malta Palestine Poland Jordan 2 Turkey 2 UK 2 Egypt 3 Saudi Arabia 3 Spain 3 India 4 Syria 4 Greece 5 38 Candidates Nationality Written Exam Warsaw 19 different Nations

24 Results from the written Exam Warsaw Candidates38 3 Repeating :2 passed, 1 failed 3 could not counted32 Passed28 (87,5%) Failed4 (12,5%)

25 Nationality Candidates Written Exam 2014 EUNon-EUSum Antalya Warsaw Sum Passed Antalya: 112; Passed Warsaw: 28; Sum 140

26 Oral exam Vienna: 144 Candidates (Waiting list 1-2?) Otol HNS Rhin 16 ex 8 Can 30‘ 16 ex 8 Can 30‘ 16 ex 8 Can 30‘ 48 ex 24 Can 90‘ SUM 1Round 6 Rounds 144 Can 540‘ 9 hrs Examiners 15 Staff

Meeting of the Review Team Victoria Ward (UK), Loppönen Heikki (Finland), Dominik Wild (UK/Austria), Wolfgang Luxenberger (Austria), Klaus Albegger (Austria) Vienna /Neustift/ Fuhrgasslhuber 27

28 Members of the Review Team EBEORL-HNS 1 Albegger Klaus Austria 2 Bien Stanislaw Poland 3 Cem Meco Turkey 4 Eichhorn Thomas Germany 5 Loppönen Heikki Finland 6 Luxenberger Wolfgang Austria 7 Neudert Marcus Germany 8 Nicolaou Angelos Greece 9 Pedersen Ulrik Denmark 10 Pracy Paul UK 11 Ward Victoria UK 12 Wild Dominik UK/Austria

29

Next Review Meeting Gumpoldskirchen 30

Letter Part 1 31

Letter Part 3 32

Letter Part 2 33

34 The UEMS Office has received s from successful candidates to the European Examination in Otorhinolaryngology requesting to certify their diplomas. We are delighted to use this opportunity to congratulate you for this achievement. Letter Part 1

35 First, we would like to stress that the UEMS Diplomas are not the titles of qualifications established by legal degree but should be considered voluntary labels of excellence awarded by the organisation of medical specialists. Their holders have demonstrated that they have reached a high level of competence in their discipline. The diplomas cannot in any way be considered a license to practise nor a title of qualification equivalent to the titles detailed in the Professional Qualifications Directive (2005/36/EC and 2013/55/EU). Letter Part 2a

36 Last year, several non-EU candidates who passed a UEMS Examination contacted the UEMS Office to help them "legalising" their UEMS diploma, as it was requested by Ministries of Health in their countries. Their aim was to work in a non-EU country. For that purpose, "legalising" a document is meant to authenticate it and has no impact or influence an the content of the document. lt is only an administrative process that proves that the document is authentic and has been issued by an officially-registered organisation and signed by the competent legal representative of this organisation. Letter Part 2b

37 The development and design of the European Board of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Examination (EBEORL-HNS) by Wolfgang Luxenberger et al., submitted European Archives ORL 2014

38 Welcome to the British Association of Otorhinolaryngologists – Head and Neck Surgeon's e-learning for ENT - platform.

39

40 EBEORL-HNS-ACTIVITIES 1.Meeting of the Review Team Written Exam Workshop/ Round Table to inform about the European ENT-Exam

41 Quality of exams Written exam Quality of MCQ‘s Viva Exam Quality of examiners Great Difference Very good UK!! Training European Certified Examiners Solution ECE

42 Thank you for your attention! If You are further interested in the European ORL Exams please contact me or Dr.Maria de la Mota Prof.Dr.Klaus Albegger 8010 Graz, Wartingergasse 37 Mobile

43

44 Which muscle is most important in the Eustachian tube opening mechanism? (Please mark one answer!) A) ❑ Levator veli palatini muscle B) ❑ Tensor veli palatini muscle C) ❑ Stylopharyngeous muscle D) ❑ Tensor tympani muscle E) ❑ Stapedial muscle

Refers to a statistical technique that helps instructors identify the effectiveness of their test items. In developing quality assessment and specifically effective multiple-choice test items, item analysis plays an important role in contributing to the fairness of the test along with identifying content areas that maybe problematic for the candidates. Item analysis b

Item Difficulty Discrimination Index Reliability of the Test = Crombach alpha Distractor Evaluation Proportion answering correctly

48 When the speech reception threshold is very high with respect to the pure tone average, it is most often due to which of the following diseases? (Please mark one answer!) A) ❑ Noise-induced hearing loss B) ❑ Presbyacusis C) ❑ Meniere's disease D) ❑ Mixed hearing loss E) ❑ Acoustic neuroma

50 A 53-year old female complains of a swelling under the mandible for the last 6 months, which has grown in the last 2 months and has become harder an palpation. What is the most appropriate management? (Please mark one answer!) ❑ Treatment with antibiotics and anti-inflammatory drugs ❑ Sonographically guided fine needle aspiration ❑ Clinical observation of the inflammatory adenopathy ❑ Perform a routine sialography every two months ❑ Request a routine, regular check-up

52 The most common cause of bilateral facial nerve paralysis in children is: A) ❑ Lyme's disease B) ❑ Melkerson-Rosenthal syndrome C) ❑ Guillain-Barre syndrome D) ❑ Möbius syndrome E) ❑ Multiple sclerosis

» PW The best option to treat a Tl a vocal fold squamous cell carcinoma is: (Please mark one answer!) A) ❑ Radiotherapy B) ❑ Endolaryngeal surgery C) ❑ Chemotherapy D) ❑ Resection via laryngofissura E) ❑ Debatable according to the case

56