How can simulated patients’ experiences suggest ways to improve candidate performance in the MRCGP clinical assessments?

Abstract

Further research on the information SP glean about candidates could help guide learning and preparation prior to clinical examinations. This will be of particular importance in preparing candidates identified as performing less well in their training posts.

Experience towards Simulated Patient-based Simulation Session: An Integrative Literature Review

“…Three studies examined the participants' experience in SP work (6)(7)(8). All three studies agreed that the positive impact by participating as an SP included the development of knowledge, particularly medical knowledge and satisfaction of opportunity to contribute to the training of future healthcare professionals.…”

“…(Continued on next page) same role (8). A study focused on medical students' experience who engaged as SP for their junior peer OSCE reported that medical students expressed positively toward SP work.…”

“…Another study done in the year 2012 reported limited data on SPs' perceived SP work, i.e. SPs considered the task was interesting and challenging (8). An interesting study was done in the year 2017 regarding SP's opinion and attitude towards incorporating SP's score into the summative assessment.…”

“…SP perceived that candidates that practiced patient-centred conversation make the future health professional or health care practitioner a 'good' consultant, while poor bedside manner was not acceptable. SPs valued listening actively without interruption, asking appropriate questions in response to SP cues, identify patient's emotional aspects, talking to patient in a natural, focused, and interesting manner, and other non-verbal communication skills (8). However, there was a significant minority of SPs tolerating poor communication skills and interpersonal skills, who justified that medical knowledge and clinical skills were more important than communication skills (8,10,11).…”

“…SPs valued listening actively without interruption, asking appropriate questions in response to SP cues, identify patient's emotional aspects, talking to patient in a natural, focused, and interesting manner, and other non-verbal communication skills (8). However, there was a significant minority of SPs tolerating poor communication skills and interpersonal skills, who justified that medical knowledge and clinical skills were more important than communication skills (8,10,11). The main idea for over-positive rating (SP gave an acceptable score while the observer gave an unacceptable score) as well as over-negative rating (SP gave an unacceptable score while the observer gave an acceptable score) to certain procedures, especially invasive procedure and potentially harm the SPs when the engagement was high (20).…”