Using Standardized Patients to Measure Quality

Evidence from the Literature and a Prospective Study

Published in: Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, v. 26, no. 11, Nov. 2000, p. 644-653

Posted on on January 01, 2000

by Peter Glassman, Jeffrey Luck, Elizabeth M. O'Gara, John Peabody

BACKGROUND: Use of standardized patients for evaluating the clinical skills of medical students and medical trainees is commonplace. This has encouraged the use of standardized patients to evaluate the quality of physician practice in outpatient settings. However, there may be substantive differences between observing student performance and evaluating whether the provision of care meets defined quality criteria. OBJECTIVES: This study had two primary objectives: (1) to review studies that use standardized patients to evaluate physician performance and (2) to ascertain directly whether standardized patients could be useful in assessing quality of outpatient care. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review of studies that used standardized patients to assess physician performance was conducted. A prospective study that included 20 physicians at two outpatient settings and 22 actor patients assessed quality of care using eight clinical cases divided into five clinical domains, each of which had explicit criteria checklists based on widely accepted guidelines. RESULTS: The literature review identified five important issues: developing scenarios, selecting explicit criteria, standardizing standardized patient training, creating subterfuges, and ensuring reliability and validity of measures. In the study, trained standardized patients were able to assess physician practice accurately for common medical conditions, using proven criteria linked to health outcomes. The detection rate was 3%. There was no performance variation between actors for seven of the eight cases. CONCLUSIONS: Using standardized patients to measure the quality of care is practical and feasible. The major methodological challenge is incorporating observable evidence-based criteria into realistic scripts and objective checklists. The major logistical challenge is obtaining and maintaining undetected entry into physicians' offices.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.