St. Louis College of Pharmacy, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 May 13;77(4):77. doi: 10.5688/ajpe77477.
To determine whether there is a difference in student pharmacists' learning or satisfaction when standardized patients or manikins are used to teach physical assessment.
Third-year student pharmacists were randomized to learn physical assessment (cardiac and pulmonary examinations) using either a standardized patient or a manikin.
Performance scores on the final examination and satisfaction with the learning method were compared between groups. Eighty and 74 student pharmacists completed the cardiac and pulmonary examinations, respectively. There was no difference in performance scores between student pharmacists who were trained using manikins vs standardized patients (93.8% vs. 93.5%, p=0.81). Student pharmacists who were trained using manikins indicated that they would have probably learned to perform cardiac and pulmonary examinations better had they been taught using standardized patients (p<0.001) and that they were less satisfied with their method of learning (p=0.04).
Training using standardized patients and manikins are equally effective methods of learning physical assessment, but student pharmacists preferred using standardized patients.
确定使用标准化病人或人体模型来教授体格检查时，学生药剂师的学习效果或满意度是否存在差异。
将三年级学生药剂师随机分配使用标准化病人或人体模型来学习体格检查（心脏和肺部检查）。
在期末考试中的表现得分和对学习方法的满意度在组间进行比较。80 名和 74 名学生药剂师分别完成了心脏和肺部检查。使用人体模型接受培训的学生药剂师与使用标准化病人接受培训的学生药剂师（93.8%对 93.5%，p=0.81）在表现得分上没有差异。使用人体模型接受培训的学生药剂师表示，如果使用标准化病人进行教学，他们可能会更好地学习进行心脏和肺部检查（p<0.001），并且对他们的学习方法的满意度较低（p=0.04）。
使用标准化病人和人体模型进行培训是学习体格检查的同等有效方法，但学生药剂师更喜欢使用标准化病人。
