Evaluation of Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Medicine Simulated Patient Applications within the Scope of "The ASPiH Standards 2023"

Year 2025, Volume: 32

Giray Kolcu , Mukadder İnci Başer Kolcu

Abstract

Objective: Simulated patient (SP) applications are the general name for educational activities in the field of health that are carried out through simulated patients playing the role of trained patients. This study aimed to evaluate the Simulated Patient Laboratory of Süleyman Demirel University within the scope of the Association for Simulated Practice in Healthcare (ASPiH) 2023 Accreditation Standards".
Material and Method: This study used a qualitative research design. “Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Medicine Simulated Patient Laboratory” was determined as the study area. Based on the decision of the board of the Department of Medical Education and Informatics, medical faculty members who took an active role in every stage of the accreditation process in the evaluation of the subject of the study were selected as in-house evaluators, and two trainers who participated in simulated patient applications and organized training in a different institution were selected as peer evaluators and invited to participate in the study. At the end of the laboratory evaluation, a report was prepared and presented to laboratory supervisors and medical faculty members.
Results: Within the scope of the study, the laboratory was evaluated over 17 standards for one day. The evaluation revealed that 15 (88%) items were fully met and two (12%) items were partially met.
Conclusion: The accreditation of our laboratory by an international organization is valuable for the quality processes of our faculty of medicine. As a result of this study, we believe that our laboratory can undergo international accreditation by conducting improvement studies in areas necessary for improvement.

Keywords

accreditation, simulated patient applications, simulated patient laboratory

Ethical Statement

For the study, written permission was obtained from the developer of the scale and ethics committee approval was obtained from Süleyman Demirel University Health Sciences Ethics Committee dated 29.05.2024 and numbered 76/9. In the ethics committee approval, a commitment was made that there was no relationship between the data collection process of the participating students and the educational processes. Ethical approval indicates that the study adheres to ethical standards regarding human participants, including considerations of privacy, consent, fairness, and beneficence. This approval confirmed that the research was conducted in accordance with ethical principles and that the rights of the participants were protected.

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Simüle Hasta Uygulamalarının “The ASPiH Standards 2023” Kapsamında Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Simüle hasta (SH) uygulamaları eğitim almış hasta rolü oynayan simüle hastalar aracılığıyla gerçekleştirilen sağlık alanındaki eğitim etkinliklerinin genel adıdır. Bu çalışmada Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Simüle Hasta Laboratuvarı’nın “The ASPiH 2023 Akreditasyon Standartları” kapsamında değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmaktadır.
Yöntem: Çalışma nitel araştırma deseninde tasarlanmıştır. Çalışma alanı olarak “Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Simüle Hasta Laboratuvarı” belirlenmiştir. Tıp Eğitimi ve Bilişim Anabilim Dalı kurulu kararı ile çalışmanın konusuna bahis değerlendirmede akreditasyon süreçlerinin her aşamasında aktif görev almış görevli öğretim üyeleri kurum içi değerlendirmeci olarak, farklı bir kurumda simüle hasta uygulamalarına katılmış ve eğitim düzenlemiş iki eğitici de akran değerlendirmeci olarak seçilmiş ve çalışmaya davet edilmiştir. Laboratuvarın değerlendirilmesi sonunda bir rapor hazırlanarak laboratuvar sorumlularına ve fakülte yönetimine sunulmuştur.
Bulgular: Çalışma kapsamında laboratuvar bir gün süre ile 17 standart üzerinden değerlendirilmiştir. Değerlendirme sonucunda 15 (%88) maddenin tamamıyla karşılanmakta olduğu, 2 (%12) maddenin ise kısmen karşılanmakta olduğu tespit edilmiştir.
Sonuç: Laboratuvarımızın uluslararası bir kuruluş tarafından akredite edilmesi fakültemizin kalite süreçleri yönünden oldukça değerlidir. Bu çalışma neticesinde laboratuvarımızın geliştirmesi için gerekli alanlardaki iyileştirme çalışmaları ile uluslararası akreditasyona başvuru yapabileceği kanaatindeyiz.

Keywords

akreditasyon, simüle hasta uygulamaları, simüle hasta laboratuvarı

References

• 1. Nestel D, Bearman M. Simulated patient methodology: Theory, Evidence, and Practice. John Wiley & Sons 2014.
• 2. Choi YH, Son HJ, Lee JH, Chung CS, Hong KP, Ahn BH, et al. Use of standardized patients in medical education. Korean J Med Educ 1970.
• 3. Khan K, Pattison T, Sherwood M. Simulation in medical education. Med Teach. 2011;33(1):1–3.
• 4. Passiment M, Sacks H and Huang G. Medical Simulation in Medical Education: Results of an AAMC Survey. The Association of American Medicine, Chicago. http://www.aamc.org 2011.
• 5. Taylor S, Haywood M, Shulruf B. Comparison of effect between simulated patient clinical skill training and student role play on objective structured clinical examination performance outcomes for medical students in Australia. J Educ Eval Health Prof 2019;16(3):1-7. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.3.
• 6. Perera J, Perera J, Abdullah J, Lee N. Training simulated patients: Evaluation of a training approach using self-assessment and peer/tutor feedback to improve performance. BMC Med Educ 2009;9(1):1-6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-9-37.
• 7. Rickles NM, Tieu P, Myers L, Galal S, Chung V. Impact of a standardized patient program on students’ learning of communication skills. Am J Pharm Educ 2009;73(1):1-10.
• 8. Shah R, Edgar DF, Evans BJW. Use of simulated and standardized patients in education, training, and assessment. Optom Pract 2018;19(1):1-10.
• 9. Bokken L, Linssen T, Scherpbier A, van der Vleuten C, Rethans JJ. Feedback from simulated patients in undergraduate medical education: A systematic review of the literature. Med Educ 2009;43(3):202-210.
• 10. Kodikara K, Senaviratne T, Premaratna R. Medical students’ experience of training on simulated and real patients in education: A qualitative exploration. Educ Med J [Internet] 2023;15(3):29–40. http://10.0.83.67/eimj2023.15.3.3
• 11. Motola I, Devine LA, Chung HS, Sullivan JE, and Issenberg SB. Simulation in healthcare education: A best practical evidence guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Med Teach 2013;35(10):e1511-30.
• 12. Ker JS, Dowie A, Dowell J, Dewar G, Dent JA, Ramsay J, et al. Twelve tips for developing and maintaining a simulated patient bank. Med Teach 2005;27(1):4–9.
• 13. Diaz-Navarro C, Laws-Chapman C, Moneypenny M, Purva M. ASPiH Standards 2023: Guiding simulation-based practice in health and care [Internet] 2023. https://aspih.org.uk
• 14. Kolcu, G , Başer Kolcu M. Youtube. 2023. Information about the simulated patient laboratory. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xixk8PfVK_A
• 15. Wagenschutz H, Ross P, Purkiss J, Yang J, Middlemas S, Lypson M. Standardized Patient Instructor (SPI) interactions are a viable way to teach medical students about health behavior counseling. Patient Educ Couns 2011;84(2):271-274. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.07.047.
• 16. Elman D, Hooks R, Tabak D, Regehr G, Freeman R. Effectiveness of unannounced standardized patients in the clinical setting as a teaching intervention. Med Educ 2004;38(9):969-973.
• 17. Barrows HS. Overview of the use of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. AAMC. Acad Med [Internet] 1993;68(6):443–451. https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001888-199306000-00002.
• 18. Long-Bellil LM, Robey KL, Graham CL, Minihan PM, Smeltzer SC, Kahn P. Teaching medical students about disability: The use of standardized patients. Acad Med 2011;86(9):1163-1170.
• 19. Keiser MM, Turkelson C. Using Students as Standardized Patients: Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Standardized Patient Training Program. Clin Simul Nurs 2017;13(7):321–330.
• 20. Morgan J, Green V, Blair J. Using simulation to prepare for clinical practice. Clin Teach 2018;15(1):57-61. doi: 10.1111/tct.12631.
• 21. Yıldırım Sarı H, Doğan P. Öğrencilerin Görme Engelli Simüle Hasta ile İletişim Becerilerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Pilot Çalışma. J Infant Child Adolescents Heal 2022;2(1):1-10.
• 22. Şenol Y, Başarıcı İ. S. Student opinions about standardized patient practices: First-year results. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası 2014;13(41):19–26.
• 23. Kolcu G, Başer Kolcu Mİ. Comparison of different rater scores in the simulated patient training program. Internatıonal J Interdıscıplınary Interactıon Heal Scıences 2023;2(2):45–54.
• 24. Özan S, Yurdabakan İ. Öz ve akran değerlendirmenin temel iletişim becerileri başarısı üzerindeki etkileri. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası 2008;27(27):27–39.
• 25. Mercan N, Özcan CT, Aydın MS. Psikiyatride ve İletişim Eğitiminde simüle hasta uygulamaları. Psikiyatr Guncel Yaklasimlar - Curr Approaches Psychiatry 2018;10(3):292–301.
• 26. Şendir M. Kadın sağlığı hemşireliği eğitiminde simulasyon kullanımı. Florence Nightingale J, Nurs 2013;21(3):205–12.
• 27. Sarıkaya Ö, Uzuner A, Gülpınar MA, Keklik D, Kalaça S. İletişim becerileri eğitimi: İçerik ve değerlendirme. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası 2004;14(14):27-36.
• 28. Ağadayı E, Çetinkaya S, Karagöz N, Nemmezi Karaca S, Bozdoğan N. Simüle hasta uygulamasında öğrencilerin anamnez alma becerilerinin öğrenci, hasta ve öğretim üyesi gözünden değerlendirilmesi. 8. International Trakya Family Medicine Congress, Proceedings of the Book 2019;156.
• 29. Kolcu G, Başer Kolcu Mİ. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Simüle Hasta Laboratuvarı. Akademisyen Kitabevi; 2024.
• 30. Cleland JA, Abe K and Rethans JJ. Use of simulated patients in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 42. Med Teach 2009;31(6):477–86.