Critical appraisal of simulated patient methodology to assess the practice of community pharmacist in the Middle East and North Africa region: A systematic review.

Abstract

The use of simulated patient (SP) methodology in pharmacy practice settings has increased recently. However, its applications can vary significantly within a region, hence affecting the quality of the SP methodology. The purpose of this systematic review is to critically assess the use of the SP methodology for assessing the practice of community pharmacists (CP) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest, and SCOPUS to identify articles published from 2011 to 2022. The selection of relevant studies for inclusion in the systematic review was based on the pre-determined inclusion criteria. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Electronic search yielded 478 publications. A total of 45 studies were reviewed. The studies were conducted in 12 countries of the MENA region. The sample size between the reviewed articles ranged from 20 to 1000 (median= 129). A greater number of the included studies measured the adequacy of skill (pre-dispensing and/or post-dispensing) 38 (84.4%). The vast majority of the studies reported unsatisfactory results regarding the competencies of CP. The number of the SP ranged from 1 to 37 (median= 2). Most of the studies recruited only one SP per pharmacy 35 (77.8%). The most common data collection method was written data collection form 42 (93.3%). Few studies only had a detection system for SP visits 11 (24.4%), and only six studies incorporated performance feedback (13.3%). More than two-thirds of the studies provided a training session for SP 37 (82.2%). There was variation in the symptoms and drugs used in the SP scenarios in the studies. Although the results demonstrate the growth in the use of the SP method in MENA region countries, studies showed high variability in the level of reporting the study methodology. Consequently, we argue the need for standardized reporting of these studies.