Abstract:

Introduction:
Standardized patients (SPs) play an important role in the training of medical students’ clinical skills. We hypothesized that the SPs can also contribute to assessing the communication skill (CS) of medical students. This study was conducted to answer the question of whether the SPs are qualified to assess the CS of 2nd-year medical students.

Methods:
This cross-sectional study we conducted in July 2022 on a group of 2nd-year medical students of UMP.HCMC. For the logistic reason, we selected 1 out of every 4 students in a group of 400 to participate in the study. There were 20 standard patients trained through 4 rounds including presenting the situation, identifying communication skills, marking through the electronic checklist through video, and testing with students like reality. Then select 14 qualified people. Both assessor and SPs evaluated and scored each student according to the 10 checklist items. I#1-3 are related to the greeting and self-introduction, I#4-8 to assess the CS in history talking, and I#9-10 to assess professionalism. The SP encounter last around 6 minutes, and the assessor observes it through the video system. The assessor and SPs have 1 minute to evaluate the learner after each OSCE session.
We use STATA* version 14.2 to calculate Cohen's Kappa interrater reliability coefficient of SPs and assessor scores.

Results:
With 94 reviews compared, the mean scored by SPs (8.55±1.01) and by lecturers (9.19±1.09), p<0.001.
Items (1),(9), and (10) show that the correlation between the two groups of SPs and lecturers is almost absolute. Items (5) encouragement; (6) praise and (8) empathy show that the correlation between the two groups of SPs and the lecturer is at a low level. The remaining items (2), (3), (4), and (7) show that there is no correlation between the 2 groups of SPs and lecturers. The mean Kappa of the 2 groups is 0.47

Discussion:
The mean score of SPs (8.55) in our study is lower than lecturers (9.19), in contrast to the assessment of McLaughlin (90.4 & 82.2). The difference may be due to SPs’ ability to identify CS and the seriousness of the assessment. The results of the correlation coefficient are similar to McLaughlin’s (0.4) but much lower than that of Shirazi’s (0.88). The difference may be due to either a larger number of students (20 students/SP) or a short assessment time (1min).

Conclusion:
Some authors suggest that CS is best assessed by the SPs. Although the correlation is not high, the role of SPs in assessing students' CS will be increasingly important, especially for active feedback.

Keywords:

Standardized patients, communication skills, correlation, assessment, Formative OSCE, feedback.