Faculty Bibliography

Standardized patients (SPs) are a widely used, valid, and reliable means of teaching and evaluating healthcare providers (HCPs) across all levels of training and across multiple domains of both clinical and communication skills. Most research on SP programs focuses on outcomes pertinent to the learners (i.e., HCPs) rather than how this experience affects the SPs themselves. This review seeks to summarize the current literature on the risks and benefits of being an SP. We reviewed the literature on the effects that simulation has on adults, children/adolescents, and medical professionals who serve as SPs, in addition to real patients (RPs) who are involved in teaching by sharing their medical histories and experiences. To collect the literature, we conducted two separate systematic searches: one for SPs and one for RPs. Following the searches, we applied standardized eligibility criteria to narrow the literature down to articles within the scope of this review. A total of 67 studies were included that focused on the outcomes of SPs or RPs. The benefits for those portraying SP roles include improved health knowledge and attitudes, relationships with their HCPs, and changed health behaviors. Negative effects of being an SP include anxiety, exhaustion/fatigue, and physical discomfort immediately following a simulation, but the literature to date appears to indicate that there are no long-lasting effects. These findings are consistent across age groups and the type of role being simulated. They are also supported by studies of RPs who are involved in medical education. Overall, the benefits of being an SP appear to outweigh the known risks. However, there are significant limitations in the current literature, and additional studies are needed to better characterize the SP experience.

Simulation in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) training captures a range of interpersonal, cognitive, and technical skills. However, trainee perspectives on simulation-based assessment remain unexplored. After an observed structured clinical examination (OSCE) simulation hybrid exam, two focus groups of residents were conducted. Analysis grounded in a thematic coding guided the qualitative research process. Responses suggest a valuation of cognitive and technical skills over interpersonal skills. Realism was seen as critical and residents perceived the assessment as more valuable for the educator than the learner. Feedback was highly valued. Resident perspectives on this exam give insight into their perceptions of simulation-based assessment as well as their conceptions of their own learning through simulations.