It is strictly forbidden to mention any content of the test or patients you encountered, so all I can say is, that in my opinion, you would be unlikely to ever encounter a positive physical finding besides a psych issue or pain. This leads me to believe that (1) the physical exam isn't that important for passing and (2) it's a stupid test because every one of your patients is malingering. They can't have any objective physical findings to correlate with any of their history, unless those findings can be faked, in which case they are malingering, which in itself is a totally separate diagnosis that you should theoretically be able to pick up on (oh so it hurts for me to even slightly touch your elbow? You didn't seem to mind when I banged on your triceps tendon 4 times. -- this is an example scenario, not a real case I encountered). In that case, the diagnosis is not tennis elbow, it's malingering. The review books tell you that patients cannot lie. This is, clearly, not the case. It's acting -- The whole thing is a lie! The appropriate way to test us is to have us examine real patients. This is what we do in medical school and internship. If a US medical school and residency programs graduates us (obviously based off of our experiences with real patients), that should be good enough, but for some reason, they can't be trusted, and the better way to make sure we will be good doctors is to send us across the country to pretend with fake patients on a $1500 exam.
Again, just my opinion.
