METHODS: Human respiratory epithelial cells were serially passaged using a co-culture system and a conventional dispase-dissociation technique. The growth kinetics and gene expression levels of the cultured respiratory epithelial cells were compared. Four genes were investigated, namely cytokeratin-18, a marker for ciliated and secretory epithelial cells; cytokeratin-14, a marker for basal epithelial cells; MKI67, a proliferation marker; and MUC5B, a marker for mucin secretion. Immunocytochemical analysis was performed using monoclonal antibodies against the high molecular-weight cytokeratin 34 beta E12, cytokeratin 18, and MUC5A to investigate the protein expression from cultured respiratory epithelial cells.
RESULTS: Respiratory epithelial cells cultured using both methods maintained polygonal morphology throughout the passages. At passage 1, co-cultured respiratory epithelial showed a 2.6-times higher growth rate compared to conventional dispase dissociation technique, and 7.8 times higher at passage 2. Better basal gene expression was observed by co-cultured respiratory epithelial cells compared to dispase dissociated cells. Immunocytochemical analyses were positive for the respiratory epithelial cells cultured using both techniques.
CONCLUSION: Co-culture system produced superior quality of cultured human respiratory epithelial cells from the nasal turbinates as compared to dispase dissociation technique.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted via a validated 49-item questionnaire, administered immediately after all students completed the examination. The questionnaire comprised of questions to evaluate the content and structure of the examination, perception of OSCE validity and reliability, and rating of OSCE in relation to other assessment methods. Open-ended follow-up questions were included to generate qualitative data.
RESULTS: Over 80% of the students found the OSCE to be helpful in highlighting areas of weaknesses in their clinical competencies. Seventy-eight percent agreed that it was comprehensive and 66% believed it was fair. About 46% felt that the 15 minutes allocated per station was inadequate. Most importantly, about half of the students raised concerns that personality, ethnicity, and/or gender, as well as interpatient and inter-assessor variability were potential sources of bias that could affect their scores. However, an overwhelming proportion of the students (90%) agreed that the OSCE provided a useful and practical learning experience.
CONCLUSIONS: Students' perceptions and acceptance of the new method of assessment were positive. The survey further highlighted for future refinement the strengths and weaknesses associated with the development and implementation of an OSCE in the International Islamic University Malaysia's pharmacy curriculum.