Indexing
CÁC SỐ TỪ 2011-2023
Tạp chí Y Dược Học
Abstract
Background: Standardized patient (SP)-based simulation has been increasingly adopted in medical education to enhance students’ communication skills. However, students’ perceptions of this teaching method may vary across different stages of training and remain underexplored in Vietnam.
Objectives: (1) To assess medical students' perceptions of standardized patient-based communication skills training. (2) To compare perceptions between preclinical and clinical students.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 853 second-year and fifth-year medical students at Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University. Data were collected using a questionnaire that combined two previously published instruments: Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients (MaSP) and the Standardized Patient Encounter Feedback Form (SPEF), covering three domains: authenticity, feedback quality, and educational support provided by standardized patients. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0, and comparisons between the two groups were performed using the Mann–Whitney U test.
Results: Students demonstrated positive perceptions toward standardized patient- based learning, with mean scores ranging from 3.87 ± 0.64 to 4.00 ± 0.68. The educational support domain received the highest rating (4.00 ± 0.68). The study instrument showed high internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.903 to 0.934. Fifth-year students reported significantly higher perception scores than second-year students across all three domains (p < 0.001). Both groups showed a high level of agreement regarding the role of standardized patients in facilitating learning, improving communication skills, and promoting active student engagement.
Conclusions: Medical students held positive perceptions of standardized patient - based learning. Clinical students rated this teaching method more favorably than preclinical students. These findings underscore the important role of standardized patients in enhancing communication skills education and bridging the gap between simulated and real clinical learning environments.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Hue Journal of Medicine and Pharmacy
Levinson W, Lesser CS, Epstein RM. Developing physician communication skills for patient-centered care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1310-1318.
Silverman J, Kurtz S, Draper J. Skills for Communicating with Patients. 2nd ed. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing; 2005.
Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;306(9):978-988.
Barrows HS. An overview of the uses of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. Acad Med. 1993;68(6):443-451.
Lane C, Rollnick S. The use of simulated patients and role-play in communication skills training: a review of the literature to August 2005. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67(1-2):13-20.
Wind LA, van Dalen J, Muijtjens AMM, Rethans JJ. Assessing simulated patients in an educational setting: the Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients. Med Educ. 2004;38(1):39-44. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2004.01686.x.
Walker SE, McLaughlin K, Hodges B, Dagnone JD, Papadakos J. The development and validation of the Standardized Patient Encounter Feedback Form (SPEF) for communication skills teaching. Med Teach. 2010;32(6):e246-e251.
Rutherford-Hemming T, Lioce L, Breymier T. Standards of Best Practice: Simulation. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;58:9-15.
Society for Simulation in Healthcare. Standards of Best Practice: Standardized Patients [Internet]. Washington (DC): Society for Simulation in Healthcare; [cited 2026 Jul 24]. Available from: https://www.ssih.org/Portals/48/SSIHSBPE_StandardizedPatients.pdf
Kolb DA. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Education; 2015.
Motola I, Devine LA, Chung HS, Sullivan JE, Issenberg SB. Simulation in healthcare education: a best evidence practical guide. Med Teach. 2013;35(10):e1511-e1530. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.818632.
Harden RM. Outcome-based education: the future is today. Med Teach. 2007;29(7):625-629.
Frank JR, Snell L, Englander R, Holmboe ES. Implementing competency-based medical education: moving forward. Med Teach. 2017;39(6):568-573.
Wartman SA, Combs CD. Medical education must move from the information age to the age of artificial intelligence. Acad Med. 2018;93(8):1107-1109.
Chan KS, Zary N. Applications and challenges of implementing artificial intelligence in medical education: an integrative review. JMIR Med Educ. 2019;5(1):e13930.