• Title of article

    The use of virtual patients to teach medical students history taking and communication skills

  • Author/Authors

    Amy Stevens، نويسنده , , Jonathan Hernandez، نويسنده , , Kyle Johnsen، نويسنده , , Robert Dickerson، نويسنده , , Andrew Raij، نويسنده , , Cyrus Harrison، نويسنده , , Meredith DiPietro، نويسنده , , Bryan Allen، نويسنده , , Richard Ferdig، نويسنده , , Sebastian Foti، نويسنده , , Jonathan Jackson، نويسنده , , Min Shin، نويسنده , , Juan Cendan، نويسنده , , Robert Watson، نويسنده , , Margaret Duerson، نويسنده , , Benjamin Lok، نويسنده , , Marc Cohen، نويسنده , , Peggy Wagner، نويسنده , , D. Scott Lind، نويسنده ,

  • Issue Information
    روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2006
  • Pages
    6
  • From page
    806
  • To page
    811
  • Abstract
    Background At most institutions, medical students learn communication skills through the use of standardized patients (SPs), but SPs are time and resource expensive. Virtual patients (VPs) may offer several advantages over SPs, but little data exist regarding the use of VPs in teaching communication skills. Therefore, we report our initial efforts to create an interactive virtual clinical scenario of a patient with acute abdominal pain to teach medical students history-taking and communication skills. Methods In the virtual scenario, a life-sized VP is projected on the wall of an examination room. Before the virtual encounter, the student reviews patient information on a handheld tablet personal computer, and they are directed to take a history and develop a differential diagnosis. The virtual system includes 2 networked personal computers (PCs), 1 data projector, 2 USB2 Web cameras to track the user’s head and hand movement, a tablet PC, and a microphone. The VP is programmed with specific answers and gestures in response to questions asked by students. The VP responses to student questions were developed by reviewing videotapes of students’ performances with real SPs. After obtaining informed consent, 20 students underwent voice recognition training followed by a videotaped VP encounter. Immediately after the virtual scenario, students completed a technology and SP questionnaire (Maastricht Simulated Patient Assessment). Results All participants had prior experience with real SPs. Initially, the VP correctly recognized approximately 60% of the student’s questions, and improving the script depth and variability of the VP responses enhanced most incorrect voice recognition. Student comments were favorable particularly related to feedback provided by the virtual instructor. The overall student rating of the virtual experience was 6.47 ± 1.63 (1 = lowest, 10 = highest) for version 1.0 and 7.22 ± 1.76 for version 2.0 (4 months later) reflecting enhanced voice recognition and other technological improvements. These overall ratings compare favorably to a 7.47 ± 1.16 student rating for real SPs. Conclusions Despite current technological limitations, virtual clinical scenarios could provide students a controllable, secure, and safe learning environment with the opportunity for extensive repetitive practice with feedback without consequence to a real or SP.
  • Keywords
    communication skills , Standardized patients , Virtual patients , Virtual Reality
  • Journal title
    The American Journal of Surgery
  • Serial Year
    2006
  • Journal title
    The American Journal of Surgery
  • Record number

    618306