A systematic review of the use of unannounced standardized patients (USPs) in clinical settings: A call for more detailed quality and fidelity descriptions and expansion to new areas
Jeffrey A. Wilhite,Zoe Phillips,Lisa Altshuler,Gabriel Hernan,Raphaella Lambert,Joey Nicholson,Kathleen Hanley,Colleen Gillespie,Sondra Zabar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2024.108437
IF: 3.467
2024-09-15
Patient Education and Counseling
Abstract:Objective Unannounced standardized patients (USPs) have long been used to measure clinical performance in situ. These incognito actors capture data on clinician skills and patient experience. Given the widespread expansion of USPs, we conducted a systematic review with the goal of capturing USP uses across settings. Methods In collaboration with a medical librarian, we conducted searches across six databases. Data extracted included: target population, setting, and assessed skills. Reliability and fidelity measures, including detection, training methods, and assessment measures were also captured. Results 128 articles were included. Individual clinicians were the most frequently targeted (n=116, 91%). The collective care team was the target in one study (1%). Studies were primarily conducted in ambulatory settings (n=120, 93%). History gathering (n=91, 71%), communication (n=66, 52%), counseling (n=42, 33%), and patient education (n=46, 36%) were commonly assessed, as were correct diagnosis (n=33, 25.8%) and appropriate ordering of labs/tests (n=39, 31%). Detection information was not provided for 60 studies. Further, 22% of articles did not provide details on SP training. 82 (64%) reported case fidelity. Measures of inter-rater reliability were reported in 81 (63%) articles. Conclusions USPs capture a range of data domains but lack of uniform validity and reliability measures can undermine findings.
public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, interdisciplinary