Development and evaluation of pilot simulated patient centre: Learning from the experience

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the performance of paid actor-simulated patients: 1) before and after a simulated patient training programme aiming for programme enhancement; 2) to postgraduate/staff-simulated patients. Methods: Fifty-six student participants watched a series of video recordings of student pharmacist-paid actor-simulated patients role-playing and blindly assessed the performance of paid actor-simulated patients pre- and post-training using the Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients (MaSP). Seventy-three student participants compared the paid actor-simulated patients’ performance to postgraduate/staff-simulated patients. Data collected were analysed using paired t-tests and independent t-tests, respectively. Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in the collated MaSP scores for paid actor-simulated patients’ performance post-training in the authenticity of role-playing (mean score ± standard deviation (SD): 2.61 ± 0.30 (Pre-training); 2.70 ± 0.31 (Post-training), p < 0.05) but not the quality of feedback. Similarly, paid actor-simulated patients performed better (in the authenticity of role-playing but not the quality of feedback) when compared to postgraduate/staff-simulated patients. Conclusions: Paid actor-simulated patients require improvement in providing quality feedback to students to enhance students’ learning.