The Contribution of Simulated Patients to Undergraduate Medical Education: A Pathway to Educational Excellence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.22902Keywords:
Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Undergraduate/methods, Patient SimulationAbstract
The aim of this narrative review is to explore the state of the art in using simulated patients’ methodology, highlighting its benefits and advocating for its widespread adoption as a cornerstone of excellence in training. The use of patients in undergraduate medical education is essential and recommended at an early stage of medical training. However, using real patients is accompanied by several difficulties, such as patient privacy and the unpredictability of patient conditions. Simulated patients are now an integral part of medical school faculty. They should be viewed as some of their most valuable collaborators as their spectrum of activity has been progressively expanding, and they are taking on new challenges and responsibilities. Its efficient use leads to the development of technical competence in performing procedures and the ability to make decisions about diagnosis or treatment. They are also essential in training the ability to communicate efficiently with patients and work as a team. The use of simulated patients to teach physical examination has dramatically expanded its use, with emphasis on training in gynecological or breast examination in women or genital and rectal examination in men. The possibility for the student to receive feedback from the simulated patient during or after the simulation represents a unique opportunity for the student to understand the ‘patient’s’ point of view and reflect on their limitations and opportunities for improvement. Using simulated patients in medical assessment ensures that students are exposed to the same clinical scenario and evaluated according to the same criteria. The simulated patient, acting as a performance evaluator, provides a level of reliability identical to that of clinical evaluators, enhancing the credibility of the assessment process. The development of hybrid scenarios allows the combined use of simulated patients and simulators to increase the realism of the simulation scenario. From an administrative perspective, using simulated patients in medical education involves recruitment and training, and the biggest challenge is the financial resources it requires. [...]
Downloads
References
Osler W. On the need for a radical reform in our teaching methods: senior students. Medical News. 1903;82:49-53.
Miller G. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990;65:S63-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045
Cohen S. Instructional alignment: searching for a magic bullet. Educ Res. 1987;16:16-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X016008016
Herrera-Aliaga E, Estrada L. Trends and innovations of simulation for twenty-first-century medical education. Front Public Health. 2022;10:e619789. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.619769
Danan A. Effectiveness of communication skills training in medical students using simulated patients or volunteer outpatients. Cureus. 2022;14:e26717. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.26717
Simpson M, Buckman R, Stewart M, McGuire P, Lipkin M, Novack D, et al. Doctor-patient communication: the Toronto Consensus Statement. BMJ. 1991;303:1385-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.303.6814.1385
Qureshi A, Zehra T. Simulated patient’s feedback to improve communication skills of clerkship students. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20:15-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1914-2
Graf J, Loda T, Zipfel S, Wosnik A, Mohr D, Herrmann-Werner A. Communication skills of medical students: a survey of self and external perception in a longitudinally based trend study. Med Educ. 2020;20:149-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02049-w
Brotons P, Virumbrales M, Elorduy M, Castellví S, Mezquita P, Gené E, et al. Improvement of medical students ‘performance in simulated patient interviews by pre-clinical communication training. Int J Med Educ. 2022;13:148-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.6299.c15f
Bokken L, Rethans J, Scherpbier A, Vleuten C. Strengths and weakness of simulated and real patients in the teaching of skills to medical students: a review. Simul Healthc. 2008;3:161-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e318182fc56
General Medical Council. Outcomes for graduates. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/outcomes-forgraduates-2020_pdf-84622587.pdf.
American Association of Medical Schools. Reshaping medical education with innovative, early clinical experiences. [cited 2024 Sep 01]. Available from: https://www.aamc.org/news/reshaping-medical-education-innovative-early-clinical-experiences.
Boelen C. WHO five-star doctor. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://pdf4pro.com/view/the-five-star-doctor-world-health-organization-62dd2b.html.
Aggarwal R, Mytton O, Derbrew M, Hananel D, Heydenburg M, Issenberg B, et al. Training and simulation for patient safety. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:i34-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2009.038562
Cleland J, Rethans A. The use of simulated patients in medical education. AMEE Guide nº 42. Med Teach. 2009;31:477-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903002821
Gliva-McConvey G, Shannon G, Pitt J, Clark L. The human simulation continuum: Integration and application. In: Gliva-McConvey G, Nicholas C, Clark L, editors. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: Implementing best practices in standardized patient methodology. London: Springer Nature; 2020. p.31-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43826-5_5
Barrows H, Abrahamson S. The programmed patient: a technique for appraising student performance in clinical neurology. J Med Educ. 1964;39:802-5.
Kretzschmar R. Evolution of the gynecology teaching associate: an education specialist. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978;131:367-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(78)90409-X
Stillman P, Sabers D, Redfield D. The use of paraprofessionals to teach interviewing skills. Pediatrics. 1975;57:769-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.57.5.769
Flanagan O, Cummings K. Standardized patients in medical education: a review of the literature. Cureus. 2023;15:e42027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.42027
Peters T, Sommer M, Fritz A, Kursch A, Thrien C. Minimum standards and development perspectives for the use of simulated patients - a position paper of the committee for simulated patients of the German Association for Medical Education. J Med Educ. 2019;36:1-13.
Gaye A. Using simulated patients in medical and health professions education. SHS Web Conf. 2019;66:1-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20196601016
Shrivastava S, Shrivastava P. Simulated patients in the training of medical students: justifying the need and points to ponder. J Med Soc. 2022;36:36-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jms.jms_113_20
Cohen-Tigor D, Gliva-McConvey G. How a revolution took hold - the standardised patient methodology. In: Gliva-McConvey G, Nicholas C, Clark L, editors. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: Implementing best practices in standardized patient methodology. London: Springer Nature; 2020. p. 13-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43826-5_3
Sterz J, Gutenberger N, Stefanescu MC, Zinber U, Bepler L, Schafer V et al. Manikins versus simulated patients in emergency medicine training: a comparative analysis. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022;48:3793-801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01695-z
McGraw R, O’Connor H. Standardized patients in the early acquisition of clinical skills. Med Educ. 1999;33:572-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999.00381.x
Tutor A, Escudero E, Avila M, Arandaa J, Torres A, Yague J, et al. Learning and assessment strategies to develop specific and transversal competencies for a humanised medical education. Front Physiol. 2023;14:e1212031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1212031
Quail M, Brundage S, Spitalnick J, Allen P, Beybi J. Student self-reported communication skill, knowledge and confidence across standardised patient, virtual and traditional clinical learning environments. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16:73-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0577-5
Wisborg T, Guttorm B, Brinchmann-Hansen A, Hansen K. Mannequin or standardised patient: Participants’ assessment of two training modalities in trauma team simulation. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2009;17:1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-17-59
Lovink A, Groenier M, VanderNiet A, Miedema H, Rethans J. The contribution of simulated patients to meaningful student learning. Perspect Med Educ. 2021;10:341-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S40037-021-00684-7
Deveugele M, Derese A, Maesschalck S, Willems S, Van Driel M, De Maeseneer J. Teaching communication to medical students, a challenge in the curriculum? Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58:265-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.004
Geoffroy P, Delyon J, Strullu M, Dinh A, Duboc H, Zafrani L, et al. Standardised patients or conventional lecture for teaching communication skills to undergraduate medical students: a randomised controlled study. Psychiatry Investig. 2020;17:299-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2019.0258
Nestel D, Tierney T. Role-play for medical students learning about communication: guidelines for maximising benefits. Med Educ. 2007;7:3-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-7-3
Miles K, O’Neill B, Li S. The Kidney model for optimising feedback in undergraduate clinical communication: a meta-ethnographic systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2024;119:e108050. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2023.108050
Christensen A, Spagnoletti C, Claxton R. A curriculum innovation on writing simulated patient cases for communication skills education. MedPortal. 2021;17:e11068. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.11068
Gliva-McConvey G, Furman G. How to train SPs in 10 steps. In: Gliva-McConvey G, Nicholas C, Clark L, editors. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: Implementing best practices in standardized patient methodology. London: Springer Nature; 2020. p.105-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43826-5_8
Nestel D, Fleishman C, Bearman M. Preparation: developing scenarios and training for role portrayal. In: Nestel D, Bearman M, editors. Simulated patient methodology. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. p. 63-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760673.ch9
Van Merriënboer J, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Med Educ. 2010;44:85-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x
Lewis K, Bohnert A, Gammon W, Holzer H, Lyman L, Smith C, et al. The association of standardised patient educators (ASPE) standards of best practice (SOBP). Adv Simul. 2017;2:10-7.
George RE, Wells H, Cushing A. Experiences of simulated patients in providing feedback in communication skills teaching for undergraduate medical students. Med Educ. 2022;22:339-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03415-6
Nestel D, Bearman M, Fleishman C. Simulated patients as teachers: the role of feedback. In Nestel D, Bearman M, editors. Simulated patient methodology. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. p. 71-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760673.ch10
Resende K, Cavaco A, Luna-Leite M, Acacio B, Pinto N, Neta M, et al. Training and standardisation of simulated patients for multicenter studies in clinical pharmacy education. Pharm Pract. 2020;18:2038-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2020.4.2038
Wind L, Dalen J, Muijtjens A, Rethans J. Assessing simulated patients in an educational setting: the MaSP (Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients). Med Educ. 2004;38:39-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2004.01686.x
Eagles J, Calder S, Wilson S, Murdoch J, Sclare P. Simulated patients in undergraduate education in psychiatry. BJPsych Bulletin. 2007;31:187-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.106.010793
Lewis KL, Bohnert CA, Gammon WL, Hölzer H, Lyman L, Smith C, et al. The Association of Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE) Standards of Best Practice (SOBP). Adv Simul. 2017;2:10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-017-0043-4
Diaz-Navarro C, Armstrong R, Charnetski M, Freeman KJ, Koh S, Reedy G, et al. Global consensus statement on simulation-based practice in healthcare. Adv Simul. 2024;9:19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00288-1
Association for Communication in Healthcare. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://each.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Basic-Principles-of-Communication-Teaching-EACH.pdf.
Burgess A, Clark T, Chapman R, Mellis C. Medical student experience as simulated patients in the OSCE. Clin Teach. 2013;10:246-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12016
Barrio L, Rodriguez-Diez C, Gea A, Arbea L, Pereira J, Diez N. Impact of a longitudinal course on medical professionalism on the empathy of medical students. Patient Educ Couns. 2024;119:e108042. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2023.108042
Hojat M, Shannon S, DeSantis J, Speicher M, Bragan L, Calabrese L. Does empathy decline in the clinical phase of medical education? A nationwide, multi-institutional, cross-sectional study of students at DO-Granting medical schools. Acad Med. 2020;95:911-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003175
Benbassat J, Baumal R, Heyman N, Brezis M. Viewpoint: suggestions for a shift in teaching clinical skills to medical students: the reflective clinical examination. Acad Med. 2005;80:1121-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200512000-00012
Nestel D, Burn C, Pritchard S, Glastonbury R, Tabak D. The use of simulated patients in medical education: guide supplement 42.1 - viewpoint. Med Teach. 2011;33:1027-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.596590
Harden R, Gleeson F. Assessment of clinical competence using an observed structured clinical examination. Med Educ. 1979;13:41-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1979.tb00918.x
Smith C, Byrne C, Nestel D. Simulated patient methodology and assessment. In: Nestel D, Bearman M, editors. Simulated patient methodology. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. p. 85-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760673.ch12
Adamo G. Simulated and standardised patients in OSCEs: achievements and challenges 1992-2003. Med Teach. 2003;25:262-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159031000100300
United States Medical Licensing Examination. Understanding the USMLE Step 2 CS Exam: a deep dive into the role of standardized patients. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://usmlepreps.com/blog/news_content/617-mastering-usmle-step-2-cs-unveiling-the-essential-role-of-standardizedpatients#:~:text=Standardized%20Patients%20(SPs)%20are%20integral,physical%20examination%2C%20and%20communication%20skills.57. Medical Council of Canada. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://mcc.ca/news/adaptability-of-mcc-teams-in-a-time-of-complexity-experiences-welearn-and-grow-from/.
Hodges B, McNaughton N. Who should be an OSCE examiner? Acad Psychiatry. 2009;33:282-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.33.4.282
Smith C, Gliva-McConvey G. Misconceptions and the evidence. In: Gliva-McConvey G, Nicholas C, Clark L, editors. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: implementing best practices in standardized patient methodology. London: Springer Nature; 2020. p.293-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43826-5_16
Allen S, Miller J, Ratner E, Santilli J. The educational and financial impact of using patient educators to teach introductory physical exam skills. Med Teach. 2011;33:911-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.558139
Weaks C, Hopkins H, Lyman L, George S. Broader applications of communication: using human body for teaching and assessment. In: Gliva-McConvey G, Nicholas C, Clark L, editors. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: implementing best practices in standardized patient methodology. London: Springer Nature; 2020. p.221-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43826-5_12
Den Harder C, van den Eertwegh V, Jongen F, Hageraats E, Nelissen S, Waterval D. Learning the breast examination with physical exam teaching associates: development and evaluation of teaching setup. An action research approach. Women Health. 2022;62:502-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2022.2085846
Power D, Center B. Examining the medical student body: peer physical exams and genital, rectal or breast exams. Teach Learn Med. 2010;17:337-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328015tlm1704_5
Reynolds K, Parle J, Irani S. Learning intimate examinations: the specialist role of gynaecological teaching associates. In: Nestel D, Bearman M, editors. Simulated patient methodology. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. p.126-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760673.ch18
Schocken D, Gammon W. Hybrid simulation. In: Palaganas J, Maxworhty J, Epps C, Mancini M, editors. Defining excellence in simulation programs. Philadephia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2015. p.235-40.
Deering S, Brown J, Hodor J, Satin A. Simulation training and resident performance of singleton vaginal breech delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;107:86-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000192168.48738.77
Sim&Skills. Geriatric simulation empathy suits. [cited 2024 Oct 01]. Available from: https://simandskills.co.uk/collections/geriatric-simulation-suits.
Kassab E, King D, Hull LM, Arora S, Sevdalis N, Kneebone RL, et al. Actor training for surgical team simulations. Med Teach. 2010;32:256-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/01421590903514648
Snow R. Real patient participation in simulation. In: Nestel D, Bearman M, editors. Simulated patient methodology. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2014. p.105-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118760673.ch14
Snow R, Sandall J, Humphrey C. What happens when patients know more than their doctors? Experiences of health interactions after diabetes patient education: a qualitative patient-led study. BMJ Open. 2013:3:e003583. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003583
Saxena P, Varghese L, Hilal H, Al-Jaberi N, Almabrouk T, Coey J. Roles of standardised patients (SPs) in medical education: students’ reflection. Eur J Anat. 2021;25:103-8.
Block L, Brenner J, Conigliaro J, Pekmezaris R, DeVoe B, Kozilkowski A. Perceptions of a longitudinal standardised patient experience by standardised patients, medical students, and faculty. Med Educ Online. 2018;23:e1548244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2018.1548244
Alerte A, Brown S, Hoag J, Wu H, Sapieha-Yanchak T, Pfeifer C, et al. Teens as teachers: improving recruitment and training of adolescent standardised patients in a simulated patient encounter. J Community Med Health Educ. 2015;5:e1000350.
ElGeed H, Hajj M, Ali R, Awaisu A. The utilisation of simulated patients for teaching and learning in the pharmacy curriculum: exploring pharmacy students and recent alumni’s perceptions using a mixed-methods approach. Med Educ. 2021;21:562-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02977-1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Acta Médica Portuguesa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All the articles published in the AMP are open access and comply with the requirements of funding agencies or academic institutions. The AMP is governed by the terms of the Creative Commons ‘Attribution – Non-Commercial Use - (CC-BY-NC)’ license, regarding the use by third parties.
It is the author’s responsibility to obtain approval for the reproduction of figures, tables, etc. from other publications.
Upon acceptance of an article for publication, the authors will be asked to complete the ICMJE “Copyright Liability and Copyright Sharing Statement “(http://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/info/AMP-NormasPublicacao.pdf) and the “Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest” (http:// www.icmje.org/conflicts-of-interest). An e-mail will be sent to the corresponding author to acknowledge receipt of the manuscript.
After publication, the authors are authorised to make their articles available in repositories of their institutions of origin, as long as they always mention where they were published and according to the Creative Commons license.
