Abstract
BACKGROUND: The few studies directly comparing the methodological approach of peer role play (RP) and standardized patients (SP) for the delivery of communication skills all suggest that both methods are effective. In this study we calculated the costs of both methods (given comparable outcomes) and are the first to generate a differential cost-effectiveness analysis of both methods. METHODS: Medical students in their prefinal year were randomly assigned to one of two groups receiving communication training in Pediatrics either with RP (N = 34) or 19 individually trained SP (N = 35). In an OSCE with standardized patients using the Calgary-Cambridge Referenced Observation Guide both groups achieved comparable high scores (results published). In this study, corresponding costs were assessed as man-hours resulting from hours of work of SP and tutors. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed a major advantage for RP as compared to SP (112 vs. 172 man hours; cost effectiveness ratio .74 vs. .45) at comparable performance levels after training with both methods. CONCLUSIONS: While both peer role play and training with standardized patients have their value in medical curricula, RP has a major advantage in terms of cost-effectiveness. This could be taken into account in future decisions.