Observational case study reveals shared decision-making discrepancies in medical student standardized patient encounters, highlighting the need for multisource feedback.
Objectives: We aimed to determine if shared decision-making (SDM) self-assessment of a standardized patient (SP) scenario was reliable, specifically whether students' communication resulted in each SP-student pair reporting internally consistent final treatment choices. We hypothesized student self-assessment would differ from SP and faculty assessment indicating a need for multisource feedback. Methods: In this observational case study from 2016-2017, all third-year post-clerkship medical students received evidence-based treatment options for sinusitis and SDM lectures followed by a SP encounter on sinusitis. Students, faculty, and SPs then completed a 9-question assessment covering SDM skills, perceived empathy, and final treatment choice. Mean self-assessment was compared to faculty and SP scores using paired t-test. Effectiveness of SDM communication was assessed as rate of treatment agreement, defined as percent of student-SP pairs reporting consistent final treatment choices. Results: = 1.40, p = .164 respectively. Seventeen (14%) student-SP pairs reported different final treatment choices. Conclusions: We demonstrated the limitations of self-perception of SDM and empathy skills, highlighting the importance of multisource feedback for assessing trainee communication skills. Disagreement between student-SP pairs on perceived final treatment choice underscores the need for ongoing SDM practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Induru et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: