Performance Improvement: Does Mock Code Simulation Improve the Confidence Level of Newly Graduated Nurses?

The study is a descriptive correlational study over three surveys that will examine the improvement of confidence level associated between the implementation of mock code training simulation and the real live event.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Mock Code Training Simulation
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: Accessing Confidence levels of Nursing students

Detailed Description

Participants will be asked to respond online to a questionnaire or survey launched via Survey Monkey®. Demographic information will be collected first Appendix B. A self-reported confidence level via the Student Satisfaction and self-confidence in learning scale will be utilized and serves as a data collection tool. The scale will be deployed via email as a scale A B and C Appendix C to each study participant and is the same scale. The participants will complete survey A after completion of the initial educational simulation training the survey B will be completed when the participants attended an unannounced simulation activity. Survey C will be completed after the first actively involved Code Blue situation. The survey is a 13-item instrument designed to measure student satisfaction five items with the simulation activity and self-confidence in learning eight items using a five-point scale. Reliability was tested using Cronbach's alpha: satisfaction equals 0.94 self-confidence equals 0.87 Franklin Burns and Lee 2014.

• Study Type: Observational
• Enrollment (Actual): 150

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • Texas
    • Dallas, Texas, United States, 75203
      • Methodist Dallas Medical Center

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

All newly graduated nurses and nurse fellows in a residency training program at MCMC Able to read and understand English

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

All newly graduated nurses and nurse fellows in a residency training program at MCMC Able to read and understand English

Exclusion Criteria:

Clinical staff not affiliated with the residency and fellowship program.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Accessing Confidence levels of Nursing students during CODE BLUE	The confidence level will be measured utilizing the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale (SCLS). SCLS is a 13-item survey instrument designed to measure student satisfaction (five items) with the simulation activity and self-confidence in learning (eight items). Statements will be confirmed with answers on a five-point Likert scale: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), undecided (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5). Measures will occur during three different activities.	2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation will improve confidence level in newly graduated nurses and nurse fellows during their residency training	The confidence level will be measured utilizing the Student Satisfaction and Self Confidence in Learning Scale (SCLS). SCLS is a 13-item survey instrument designed to measure student satisfaction (five items) with the simulation activity and self-confidence in learning (eight items). Statements will be confirmed with answers on a five-point Likert scale: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), undecided (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5). Measures will occur during three different activities.	2 yrs

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Methodist Health System
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Anne-Gret Friedrich-Cuntz, EdD, Methodist Charlton Medical Center (Methodist Health System-

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Advice, P.R.N. (2004). Staff development: Mock code, real value. Nursing2004
• Carroll L, Pignataro S. Use of portable simulation manikins to increase the frequency of mock code training on four inpatient surgical units. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2009 Jun;40(6):250-1. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20090522-04.
• Carney P. Mock code: a game that saves lives. RN (For Managers). 1983 Jul;46(7):18P. No abstract available.
• Cardoza MP, Hood PA. Comparative study of baccalaureate nursing student self-efficacy before and after simulation. Comput Inform Nurs. 2012 Mar;30(3):142-7. doi: 10.1097/NCN.0b013e3182388936.
• Franklin AE, Burns P, Lee CS. Psychometric testing on the NLN Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning, Simulation Design Scale, and Educational Practices Questionnaire using a sample of pre-licensure novice nurses. Nurse Educ Today. 2014 Oct;34(10):1298-304. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.06.011. Epub 2014 Jul 9.
• Hill CR, Dickter L, Van Daalen EM. A matter of life and death: the implementation of a Mock Code Blue Program in acute care. Medsurg Nurs. 2010 Sep-Oct;19(5):300-2, 304. No abstract available.
• Huseman KF. Improving code blue response through the use of simulation. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012 May-Jun;28(3):120-4. doi: 10.1097/NND.0b013e3182551506.
• Kakora-Shiner N. Using ward-based simulation in cardiopulmonary training. Nurs Stand. 2009 May 27-Jun 2;23(38):42-7. doi: 10.7748/ns2009.05.23.38.42.c6975.
• Marsch SC, Muller C, Marquardt K, Conrad G, Tschan F, Hunziker PR. Human factors affect the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in simulated cardiac arrests. Resuscitation. 2004 Jan;60(1):51-6. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2003.08.004.
• Ngo DQ, Vu C, Nguyen T, Sotolongo P, Talati M, Zahabi N, Platt K. The Effect of Mock Code Blue Simulations and Dedicated Advanced Cardiac Life Support Didactics on Resident Perceived Competency. Cureus. 2020 Nov 25;12(11):e11705. doi: 10.7759/cureus.11705.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): March 16, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): July 22, 2025
• Study Completion (Actual): July 22, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: July 6, 2023
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: July 6, 2023
• First Posted (Actual): July 14, 2023

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): July 25, 2025
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: July 23, 2025
• Last Verified: July 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: 008.NUR.2022.C

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: The PI is committed to disseminate research results in a timely fashion. Sharing of results generated by the data analysis during the course of the project will be through presentation at national scientific meetings and/or publication in open access journals. All information obtained will be source de-identified and presented on a large scale and not traceable to any one particular individual.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Data will become available with in 1 to 2 years. All study-related documents will be retained by the CRI until at least three years after study completion or according to local laws, whichever is longer. . Records will also be accessible to MHS staff upon request unless constituting a violation of patient confidentiality.
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: All study-related documents will be retained by the CRI until at least three years after study completion or according to local laws, whichever is longer. . Records will also be accessible to MHS staff upon request unless constituting a violation of patient confidentiality.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP; ICF; ANALYTIC_CODE; CSR

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No