Clinical Virtual Simulation in Nursing Education: Randomized Controlled Trial

José Miguel Padilha, Paulo Puga Machado, Ana Ribeiro, José Ramos, Patrício Costa, José Miguel Padilha, Paulo Puga Machado, Ana Ribeiro, José Ramos, Patrício Costa

Abstract

Background: In the field of health care, knowledge and clinical reasoning are key with regard to quality and confidence in decision making. The development of knowledge and clinical reasoning is influenced not only by students' intrinsic factors but also by extrinsic factors such as satisfaction with taught content, pedagogic resources and pedagogic methods, and the nature of the objectives and challenges proposed. Nowadays, professors play the role of learning facilitators rather than simple "lecturers" and face students as active learners who are capable of attributing individual meanings to their personal goals, challenges, and experiences to build their own knowledge over time. Innovations in health simulation technologies have led to clinical virtual simulation. Clinical virtual simulation is the recreation of reality depicted on a computer screen and involves real people operating simulated systems. It is a type of simulation that places people in a central role through their exercising of motor control skills, decision skills, and communication skills using virtual patients in a variety of clinical settings. Clinical virtual simulation can provide a pedagogical strategy and can act as a facilitator of knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, improved satisfaction with learning, and finally, improved self-efficacy. However, little is known about its effectiveness with regard to satisfaction, self-efficacy, knowledge retention, and clinical reasoning.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of clinical virtual simulation with regard to knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, self-efficacy, and satisfaction with the learning experience among nursing students.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial with a pretest and 2 posttests was carried out with Portuguese nursing students (N=42). The participants, split into 2 groups, had a lesson with the same objectives and timing. The experimental group (n=21) used a case-based learning approach, with clinical virtual simulator as a resource, whereas the control group (n=21) used the same case-based learning approach, with recourse to a low-fidelity simulator and a realistic environment. The classes were conducted by the usual course lecturers. We assessed knowledge and clinical reasoning before the intervention, after the intervention, and 2 months later, with a true or false and multiple-choice knowledge test. The students' levels of learning satisfaction and self-efficacy were assessed with a Likert scale after the intervention.

Results: The experimental group made more significant improvements in knowledge after the intervention (P=.001; d=1.13) and 2 months later (P=.02; d=0.75), and it also showed higher levels of learning satisfaction (P<.001; d=1.33). We did not find statistical differences in self-efficacy perceptions (P=.9; d=0.054).

Conclusions: The introduction of clinical virtual simulation in nursing education has the potential to improve knowledge retention and clinical reasoning in an initial stage and over time, and it increases the satisfaction with the learning experience among nursing students.

Keywords: clinical virtual simulation; nursing education; user-computer interface; virtual patient.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©José Miguel Padilha, Paulo Puga Machado, Ana Ribeiro, José Ramos, Patrício Costa. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 18.03.2019.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Clinical virtual simulation in hospital environment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Clinical virtual simulation in environments in the community.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Flow diagram of sample randomization and allocation process.

References

    1. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: do they really think differently? On the Horizon. 2001 Nov;9(6):1–6. doi: 10.1108/10748120110424843.
    1. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon. 2001 Sep;9(5):1–6. doi: 10.1108/10748120110424816.
    1. Heimann C, Prado C, de Moraes RR, Vidal G, Liberal D, Oliveira G, Barata M. [Acquiring nursing knowledge through the constructivist method] Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2013 Aug;47(4):997–1000. doi: 10.1590/S0080-623420130000400032.
    1. Chi MT. Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Top Cogn Sci. 2009 Jan;1(1):73–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x.
    1. Georg C, Zary N. Web-based virtual patients in nursing education: development and validation of theory-anchored design and activity models. J Med Internet Res. 2014 Apr 10;16(4):e105. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2556.
    1. Pennaforte T, Moussa A, Loye N, Charlin B, Audétat MC. Exploring a new simulation approach to improve clinical reasoning teaching and assessment: randomized trial protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 Feb 17;5(1):e26. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4938.
    1. Liaw SY, Chan SW, Chen FG, Hooi SC, Siau C. Comparison of virtual patient simulation with mannequin-based simulation for improving clinical performances in assessing and managing clinical deterioration: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2014 Sep 17;16(9):e214. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3322.
    1. Hege I, Kononowicz AA, Adler M. A clinical reasoning tool for virtual patients: design-based research study. JMIR Med Educ. 2017 Nov 02;3(2):e21. doi: 10.2196/mededu.8100.
    1. Kneebone R. Evaluating clinical simulations for learning procedural skills: a theory-based approach. Acad Med. 2005 Jun;80(6):549–53. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200506000-00006.
    1. Lapkin S, Fernandez R, Levett-Jones T, Bellchambers H. The effectiveness of using human patient simulation manikins in the teaching of clinical reasoning skills to undergraduate nursing students: a systematic review. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2010;8(16):661–94. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2010.05.005.
    1. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):50–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x.
    1. Yuan HB, Williams BA, Fang JB. The contribution of high-fidelity simulation to nursing students' confidence and competence: a systematic review. Int Nurs Rev. 2012 Mar;59(1):26–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-7657.2011.00964.x.
    1. Meakim C, Boese T, Decker S, Franklin AE, Gloe D, Lioce L, Sando CR, Borum JC. Standards of Best Practice: Simulation Standard I: Terminology. Clin Simul Nurs. 2013 Jun;9(6):S3–S11. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2013.04.001.
    1. Batista R, Martins J, Pereira M, Mazzo A. [High-Fidelity Simulation in the Nursing Degree: gains perceived by students] Rev Enf Ref. 2014 Mar 15;4(1):135–44. doi: 10.12707/RIII13169.
    1. Pinar G, Knight C, Gaioso V, Watts P, Dailey K, Britt S, Catron K, Zengul F. The effects of high fidelity simulation on nursing students' perceptions and self-efficacy of obstetric skills. Int Arch Nurs Health Care. 2015 Dec 31;1(1):1–7. doi: 10.23937/2469-5823/1510008.
    1. Lopreiato JO. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rockville, MD: 2016. [2019-02-11]. Healthcare Simulation Dictionary .
    1. Berman NB, Durning SJ, Fischer MR, Huwendiek S, Triola MM. The role for virtual patients in the future of medical education. Acad Med. 2016 Dec;91(9):1217–22. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001146.
    1. Chang KK, Chung J, Wong T. Learning intravenous cannulation: a comparison of the conventional method and the CathSim Intravenous Training System. J Clin Nurs. 2002 Jan;11(1):73–8.
    1. Roh YS, Lee W, Chung H, Park Y. The effects of simulation-based resuscitation training on nurses' self-efficacy and satisfaction. Nurse Educ Today. 2013 Feb;33(2):123–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.11.008.
    1. Tsai SL, Chai S, Hsieh L, Lin S, Taur F, Sung W, Doong J. The use of virtual reality computer simulation in learning Port-A cath injection. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2008 Mar;13(1):71–87. doi: 10.1007/s10459-006-9025-3.
    1. Wilson-Sands C, Brahn P, Graves K. The effect of instructional method on cardiopulmonary resuscitation skill performance: a comparison between instructor-led basic life support and computer-based basic life support with voice-activated manikin. J Nurses Prof Dev. 2015;31(5):E1–7. doi: 10.1097/NND.0000000000000203.
    1. Johnson D, Flagg A, Dremsa T. Effects of using human patient simulator versus a CD-ROM on learning the management of patients exposed to chemical agents. US Army Med Dep J. 2010:9–16.
    1. Liaw SY, Wong L, Chan S, Ho J, Mordiffi S, Ang S, Goh P, Ang E. Designing and evaluating an interactive multimedia web-based simulation for developing nurses' competencies in acute nursing care: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jan 12;17(1):e5–10. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3853.
    1. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175–91.
    1. Duarte H. Leiria School of Health. Leiria: Polytechnic Institute of Leiria; 2015. Perception of learning, satisfaction and self-efficacy of nursing students on high fidelity simulation.
    1. Nunes R, Schwarzer R, Jerusalém M. Perceived General Self-Efficacy Scale. Berlin University: Health Psychology; 1999. .
    1. Schwarzer R, Jerusalém M. Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Casual and Control Beliefs. Windsor, England: NFER-NELSON; 1995. Generalized self-eEfficacy scale; p. A.
    1. Scholz U, Gutiérrez Doña B, Sud S, Schwarzer R. Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Eur J Psychol Assess. 2002 Sep;18(3):242–51. doi: 10.1027//1015-5759.18.3.242.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
    1. Padilha JM, Machado P, Ribeiro A, Ramos J. Clinical virtual simulation in nursing education. Clin Simul Nurs. 2018 Feb;15:13–18. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2017.09.005. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2017.09.005.
    1. Tschannen D, Aebersold M, McLaughlin E, Bowen J, Fairchild J. Use of virtual simulations for improving knowledge transfer among baccalaureate nursing students. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2012 May 13;2(3):15–24. doi: 10.5430/jnep.v2n3p15.
    1. Sperl-Hillen J, O'Connor PJ, Ekstrom HL, Rush WA, Asche SE, Fernandes OD, Appana D, Amundson GH, Johnson PE, Curran DM. Educating resident physicians using virtual case-based simulation improves diabetes management: a randomized controlled trial. Acad Med. 2014 Dec;89(12):1664–73. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000406.
    1. Tiffany JM, Hoglund B. Using virtual simulation to teach inclusivity: a case study. Clin Simul Nurs. 2016 Apr;12(4):115–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2015.11.003.
    1. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986. p. A.
    1. Berman N, Fall LH, Smith S, Levine D, Maloney CG, Potts M, Siegel B, Foster-Johnson L. Integration Strategies for Using Virtual Patients in Clinical Clerkships. Acad Med. 2009;84(7):942–9. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181a8c668.
    1. Huwendiek S, Duncker C, Reichert F, De Leng BA, Dolmans D, van der Vleuten CP, Haag M, Hoffmann G, Tönshoff B. Learner preferences regarding integrating, sequencing and aligning virtual patients with other activities in the undergraduate medical curriculum: A focus group study. Med Teach. 2013 Nov;35(11):920–9. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.826790.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅