Understanding patient involvement in judging students' communication skills in OSCEs

Introduction Communication skills are assessed by medically-enculturated examiners using consensus frameworks which were developed with limited patient involvement. Assessments consequently risk rewarding performance which incompletely serves patients' authentic communication needs. Whilst regulators require patient involvement in assessment, little is known about how this can be achieved. We aimed to explore patients' perceptions of students' communication skills, examiner feedback and potential roles for patients in assessment. Methods Using constructivist grounded theory we performed cognitive stimulated, semi-structured interviews with patients who watched videos of student performances in communication-focused OSCE stations and read corresponding examiner feedback. Data were analysed using grounded theory methods. Results A disconnect occurred between participants' and examiners' views of students' communication skills. Whilst patients frequently commented on students' use of medical terminology, examiners omitted to mention this in feedback. Patients' judgements of students' performances varied widely, reflecting different preferences and beliefs. Participants viewed variability as an opportunity for students to learn from diverse lived experiences. Participants perceived a variety of roles to enhance assessment authenticity. Discussion Integrating patients into communications skills assessments could help to highlight deficiencies in students' communication which medically-enculturated examiners may miss. Overcoming the challenges inherent to this is likely to enhance graduates' preparedness for practice.

Automated summary

This study aimed to explore patients' perceptions of students' communication skills, examiner feedback and potential roles for patients in assessment. Findings revealed a disconnect between participants' and examiners' views of students' communication skills, with patients' judgments reflecting varied preferences and beliefs. Participants saw variability in assessments as an opportunity for students to learn from diverse lived experiences, and identified various roles for patients to enhance assessment authenticity.