基于高保真模拟的母婴护理学习方法
探索护理学生对母婴护理中高保真模拟学习方法的经验和态度:混合方法研究
研究类型:临床试验 - 随机对照试验 主要目的:探索高保真模拟 (HFS) 干预措施的有效性,特别是基于情景的培训,包括关于 (1) 知识和自我效能 (2 )解决问题的能力,(3)与传统培训相比,护生在婴儿护理和母乳喂养方面的学习体验。
主要结果:与对照组相比,母乳喂养自我效能感评分和干预知识次要结果:模拟设计量表和教育实践问卷
研究概览
详细说明
研究背景和理由:
护理专业的学生普遍表示,他们在妇婴护理临床环境中感到没有准备或缺乏能力。 此外,护士还担心应届毕业生的临床推理能力,这可能会导致婴儿质量或产妇结局不佳。 尽管如此重要,但很难提供更多的临床机会,尤其是在新冠病毒大流行期间。 高保真模拟学习 (HFS) 有助于弥合理论与实践之间的差距,模型引用了与“真实”情况下实践的相似之处。 通过将不同的场景、预简报和汇报纳入 HFS,学生可以增强他们的学习体验。 然而,缺乏专门研究 HFS 在护生婴儿护理和母乳喂养中的应用的研究。 HFS 对学习成果(包括知识和技能、解决问题的能力和学习体验)的影响尚不清楚。
研究类型
注册 (估计的)
阶段
- 不适用
联系人和位置
学习联系方式
- 姓名:Wai Ming CHUNG
- 电话号码:69796719
- 邮箱:h0394197@connect.hku.hk
研究联系人备份
- 姓名:Yuet Wan Lok, Dr
- 电话号码:31976690
- 邮箱:krislok@hku.hk
学习地点
-
-
Hksar
-
Hong Kong、Hksar、香港
- 招聘中
- Hong Kong Metropolitan University
-
接触:
- Wai Ming Chung, MNur
- 电话号码:+852-69796719
- 邮箱:rwmchung@hkmu.edu.hk
-
首席研究员:
- Wai Ming CHUNG, MNur
-
副研究员:
- Po Man Lee, DNur
-
副研究员:
- Hoi Ki Yeung, MNur
-
副研究员:
- Kit Wah Wong, MNur
-
副研究员:
- Yuet Wan Lok, PhD
-
-
参与标准
资格标准
适合学习的年龄
- 成人
接受健康志愿者
描述
纳入标准:
- 本研究将招募护理本科生。 参与者的纳入标准如下:(1)参加产科课程的护生(2)秘密同意模拟的护生(3)以前没有产科临床经验或培训的护生。
排除标准:
- 零
学习计划
研究是如何设计的?
设计细节
- 主要用途:其他
- 分配:随机化
- 介入模型:并行分配
- 屏蔽:单身的
武器和干预
参与者组/臂 |
干预/治疗 |
|---|---|
|
实验性的:HFS婴儿干预组
对于干预组,将提前安排高保真模拟会话。 。 |
该干预措施是一个两小时的高保真模拟培训课程,重点是新生儿评估、护理实践、皮肤接触和母乳喂养。 它使用 SimBaby 人体模型和母乳喂养模型来模仿医院环境。 情景是根据护理学生的学习水平量身定制的,并由经验丰富的助产士进行审查。 培训内容包括: 预简介:介绍学习目标、场景背景、模拟熟悉、保密讨论和基本规则。 干预:基于情景的婴儿护理和母乳喂养培训。 汇报:由模拟教育工作者审查的正负汇报模型。 培训将在护理模拟实验室进行。
传统培训包括讲座、教程和使用低保真人体模型的基础实验室。
|
|
其他:对照组采用常规
对于对照组,他们将接受常规培训。
研究完成后,将为对照组提供相同的模拟课程
|
传统培训包括讲座、教程和使用低保真人体模型的基础实验室。
|
研究衡量的是什么?
主要结果指标
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
利用母乳喂养能力自评工具对基本母乳喂养知识和技能的自我效能感
大体时间:5分钟
|
37 项修改版本旨在评估执行与母乳喂养支持相关的不同复杂性任务的自我效能
对于每个问题:最小值 = 1,最大值 = 4 分数越高意味着结果最差(自我效能感越低)。 |
5分钟
|
|
照顾新生儿和母乳喂养的知识和技能水平
大体时间:4分钟
|
20 项目
对于每个问题:最小值 = -5,最大值 = 5 分数越高意味着结果越好(更好的知识)。 |
4分钟
|
次要结果测量
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
仿真设计量表 (SDS)
大体时间:3分钟
|
20个项目,用于从学习者的角度评估模拟培训设计。 该量表评估模拟中的目标、信息、支持、问题解决、反馈和保真度等各个方面 评估模拟设计元素时使用以下评级系统:
对于每个问题:最小值 = 1,最大值 = 5 分数越高意味着结果越好(更好的设计)。 根据每个项目对您的重要性来对其进行评级。
对于每个问题:最小值 = 1,最大值 = 5 分数越高意味着结果越好(更重要)。 |
3分钟
|
|
教育实践问卷 (EPS)
大体时间:3分钟
|
16 个项目,用于了解模拟培训中教育最佳实践的存在和重要性 评估模拟设计元素时使用以下评级系统:
对于每个问题:最小值 = 1,最大值 = 5 分数越高意味着结果越好(更好的学习体验)。 根据每个项目对您的重要性来对其进行评级。
对于每个问题:最小值 = 1,最大值 = 5 分数越高意味着结果越好(更重要)。 |
3分钟
|
其他结果措施
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
人口统计调查问卷
大体时间:2分钟
|
社会人口基线
|
2分钟
|
合作者和调查者
调查人员
- 首席研究员:Wai Ming CHUNG、HKU
出版物和有用的链接
一般刊物
- Dennis CL. The breastfeeding self-efficacy scale: psychometric assessment of the short form. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2003 Nov-Dec;32(6):734-44. doi: 10.1177/0884217503258459.
- Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105-12. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.
- Gozali A, Gibson S, Lipton LR, Pressman AW, Hammond BS, Dumitriu D. Assessing the effectiveness of a pediatrician-led newborn parenting class on maternal newborn-care knowledge, confidence and anxiety: A quasi-randomized controlled trial. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Aug;147:105082. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105082. Epub 2020 May 23.
- Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simul Healthc. 2015 Apr;10(2):106-15. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072.
- Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007 Summer;2(2):115-25. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539. No abstract available.
- 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.
- Unver V, Basak T, Watts P, Gaioso V, Moss J, Tastan S, Iyigun E, Tosun N. The reliability and validity of three questionnaires: The Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale, Simulation Design Scale, and Educational Practices Questionnaire. Contemp Nurse. 2017 Feb;53(1):60-74. doi: 10.1080/10376178.2017.1282319. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
- Akalin A, Sahin S. The impact of high-fidelity simulation on knowledge, critical thinking, and clinical decision-making for the management of pre-eclampsia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020 Sep;150(3):354-360. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13243. Epub 2020 Jun 21.
- Anderson OS, Weirauch K, Roper R, Phillips J, McCabe C, Chuisano SA, Sadovnikova A. The Efficacy of Hybrid Telesimulation with Standardized Patients in Teaching Medical Students Clinical Lactation Skills: A Pilot Study. Breastfeed Med. 2021 Apr;16(4):332-337. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2020.0253. Epub 2021 Jan 25.
- Alshehri FD, Jones S, Harrison D. The effectiveness of high-fidelity simulation on undergraduate nursing students' clinical reasoning-related skills: A systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2023 Feb;121:105679. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105679. Epub 2022 Dec 5.
- Au ML, Tong LK, Li YY, Ng WI, Wang SC. Impact of scenario validity and group size on learning outcomes in high-fidelity simulation: A systematics review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2023 Feb;121:105705. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105705. Epub 2022 Dec 30.
- Blackman I, Sweet L, Byrne J. Using Rasch analysis to identify midwifery students' learning about providing breastfeeding support. Women Birth. 2015 Sep;28(3):228-35. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2015.02.001. Epub 2015 Mar 6.
- Cheng A, Grant V, Dieckmann P, Arora S, Robinson T, Eppich W. Faculty Development for Simulation Programs: Five Issues for the Future of Debriefing Training. Simul Healthc. 2015 Aug;10(4):217-22. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000090.
- Cobbett S, Snelgrove-Clarke E. Virtual versus face-to-face clinical simulation in relation to student knowledge, anxiety, and self-confidence in maternal-newborn nursing: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Educ Today. 2016 Oct;45:179-84. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2016.08.004. Epub 2016 Aug 9.
- Eppich WJ, Hunt EA, Duval-Arnould JM, Siddall VJ, Cheng A. Structuring feedback and debriefing to achieve mastery learning goals. Acad Med. 2015 Nov;90(11):1501-8. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000934.
- Fan HSL, Fong DYT, Lok KYW, Tarrant M. The Association Between Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy and Mode of Infant Feeding. Breastfeed Med. 2022 Aug;17(8):687-697. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2022.0059. Epub 2022 Jun 28.
- Grabowski A, Chuisano SA, Strock K, Zielinski R, Anderson OS, Sadovnikova A. A pilot study to evaluate the effect of classroom-based high-fidelity simulation on midwifery students' self-efficacy in clinical lactation and perceived translation of skills to the care of the breastfeeding mother-infant dyad. Midwifery. 2021 Nov;102:103078. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2021.103078. Epub 2021 Jun 30.
- Gregory A, Penrose K, Morrison C, Dennis CL, MacArthur C. Psychometric properties of the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form in an ethnically diverse U.K. sample. Public Health Nurs. 2008 May-Jun;25(3):278-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2008.00705.x.
- Al Khasawneh E, Arulappan J, Natarajan JR, Raman S, Isac C. Efficacy of Simulation Using NLN/Jeffries Nursing Education Simulation Framework on Satisfaction and Self-Confidence of Undergraduate Nursing Students in a Middle-Eastern Country. SAGE Open Nurs. 2021 Apr 20;7:23779608211011316. doi: 10.1177/23779608211011316. eCollection 2021 Jan-Dec.
- MacKinnon K, Marcellus L, Rivers J, Gordon C, Ryan M, Butcher D. Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694.
- Scholz C, Mann C, Kopp V, Kost B, Kainer F, Fischer MR. High-fidelity simulation increases obstetric self-assurance and skills in undergraduate medical students. J Perinat Med. 2012 Nov;40(6):607-13. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2012-0052.
- Melchionda MM, Aletti G, Mauri PA. Validation of a self-efficacy survey for Italian midwifery students with regard to breastfeeding support. Nurse Educ Pract. 2019 May;37:9-14. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2019.04.012. Epub 2019 Apr 17.
- Mulyadi M, Tonapa SI, Rompas SSJ, Wang RH, Lee BO. Effects of simulation technology-based learning on nursing students' learning outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Nurse Educ Today. 2021 Dec;107:105127. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105127. Epub 2021 Sep 1.
- Norman GR, Monteiro SD, Sherbino J, Ilgen JS, Schmidt HG, Mamede S. The Causes of Errors in Clinical Reasoning: Cognitive Biases, Knowledge Deficits, and Dual Process Thinking. Acad Med. 2017 Jan;92(1):23-30. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001421.
- Pies C, Parthasarathy P, Posner SF. Integrating the life course perspective into a local maternal and child health program. Matern Child Health J. 2012 Apr;16(3):649-55. doi: 10.1007/s10995-011-0800-2.
- Prepelita T, Ricchi A, Messina MP, Molinazzi MT, Cappadona R, Fieschi L, Nespoli A, Guana M, Cervi G, Parma D, Mauri PA, Artioli G, Banchelli F, Foa C, Neri I. Self-efficacy in breastfeeding support: a research on Italian midwifery students. Acta Biomed. 2020 Mar 13;91(2-S):27-34. doi: 10.23750/abm.v91i2-S.9149.
- Rashwan ZI, El Sheshtawy OR, Abdelhalim GE, Eweida RS, Khamis GM. Scenario-based clinical simulation: Bridging the gap between intern-students' anxiety and provision of holistic nursing care for preterm neonates. Nurse Educ Pract. 2021 Jul;54:103121. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2021.103121. Epub 2021 Jun 15.
- Spencer RL, Stephenson J, Thomas C. "One of those things the student is left to do". Student midwives' experience of infant feeding education. A phenomenological study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022 Aug;63:103416. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103416. Epub 2022 Jul 19.
- Tonapa SI, Mulyadi M, Ho KHM, Efendi F. Effectiveness of using high-fidelity simulation on learning outcomes in undergraduate nursing education: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023 Jan;27(2):444-458. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202301_31040.
- Tong LK, Li YY, Au ML, Wang SC, Ng WI. High-fidelity simulation duration and learning outcomes among undergraduate nursing students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2022 Sep;116:105435. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105435. Epub 2022 Jun 11.
- Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative: Revised, Updated and Expanded for Integrated Care. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK153471/
- Yang SF, Salamonson Y, Burns E, Schmied V. Breastfeeding knowledge and attitudes of health professional students: a systematic review. Int Breastfeed J. 2018 Feb 20;13:8. doi: 10.1186/s13006-018-0153-1. eCollection 2018.
- Zackoff MW, Israel SW, Browning WL, Fleming AE. Use of simulation to teach appropriate management of a crying infant. Med Teach. 2014 Feb;36(2):181. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.789496. Epub 2013 Apr 30. No abstract available.
- Zhu Y, Geng C, Pei X, Chen X. Baccalaureate nursing students' experiences with high-fidelity simulation: protocol for a qualitative systematic review. BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 8;10(12):e040171. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040171.
- Schertzer K, Patti L. In Situ Debriefing in Medical Simulation. 2022 Sep 19. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK549876/
研究记录日期
研究主要日期
学习开始 (实际的)
初级完成 (估计的)
研究完成 (估计的)
研究注册日期
首次提交
首先提交符合 QC 标准的
首次发布 (实际的)
研究记录更新
最后更新发布 (实际的)
上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新
最后验证
更多信息
此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.