Advertisement

High-Fidelity Simulation Type Technique Efficient for Learning Nursing Disciplines in the Courses of Study: An Integrative Review

  • Ilaria Farina
  • Albina Paterniani
  • Giovanni Galeoto
  • Milena Sorrentino
  • AnnaRita Marucci
  • Julita SansoniEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1008)

Abstract

Background: Simulation is considered an effective strategy for educating nursing students and practicing nurses in several clinical settings. We can therefore define the simulation as a technique to replace or report real cases with guided experiences that replicate fundamental aspects of the welfare practice in an interactive way. The aim of this study is to determine which of the different types of high-fidelity simulation is most effective as a teaching method for nurse students. Research design: A integrative review of the literature was undertaken following the framework of Whittemore and Knafl (2005); an electronic search of literature was conducted using 3 databases (CINAHL, SCOPUS and MEDLINE). This final screening yielded 18 articles, after the exclusion of articles consisting of only abstracts, review articles, and articles not relevant to the topic. Discussion: The integrative review in high-fidelity simulation type show that knowledge achieved via simulation is remembered for a longer time respect to knowledge achieved via lecture. After analyzing the data, 3 main themes were identified. Conclusion: Engaging in a realistic situation, as any type of high-fidelity simulation, provides the context for nursing students, who are often concrete thinkers, to expand their clinical reasoning and “sense of salience”. Application of knowledge is essential to insure safe, effective practice in today’s challenging healthcare setting.

Keywords

Nursing student Post graduate nursing student High fidelity simulation 

References

  1. 1.
    Makary, M.A., Daniel, M.: Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ 353, i2139 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Berwick, D.M., Hackbarth, A.D.: Eliminating waste in US health care. JAMA, J. Am. Med. Assoc. 307(14), 1513–1516 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hobgood, C., Hevia, A., Tamayo-Sarver, J.H., Weiner, B., Riviello, R.: The influence of the causes and contexts of medical errors on emergency medicine residents’ responses to their errors: an exploration. Acad. Med. 80(8), 758–764 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barton, G., Bruce, A., Schreiber, R.: Teaching nurses teamwork: Integrative review of competency-based team training in nursing education. Nurse Educ. Pract. 32, 129–137 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    La Cerra, C., Dante, A., Caponnetto, V., Franconi, I., Gaxhja, E., Petrucci, C., Alfes, C.M., Lancia, L.: Effects of high-fidelity simulation based on life-threatening clinical condition scenarios on learning outcomes of undergraduate and postgraduate nursing students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 9(2), e025306 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leigh, G.T.: High-fidelity patient simulation and nursing students’ self-efficacy: a review of the literature. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Sch.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Whittemore, R., Knafl, K.: The integrative review: updated methodology. J. Adv. Nurs. 52(5), 546–553 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP): CASP checklists, Oxford (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khan, K.S., Ter Riet, G., Glanville, J., Sowden, A.J., Kleijnen, J.: Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD’s guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews, 2nd edn, no. 4. CRD Report (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G.: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6(7), e1000097 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nevin, M., Neill, F., Mulkerrins, J.: Preparing the nursing student for internship in a pre-registration nursing program: developing a problem based approach with the use of high fidelity simulation equipment. Nurse Educ. Pract. 14(2), 154–159 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ignacio, J., Dolmans, D., Scherpbier, A., Rethans, J.J., Chan, S., Liaw, S.Y.: Comparison of standardized patients with high-fidelity simulators for managing stress and improving performance in clinical deterioration: a mixed methods study. Nurse Educ. Today 35(12), 1161–1168 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee, J., Lee, Y., Lee, S., Bae, J.: Effects of high-fidelity patient simulation led clinical reasoning course: focused on nursing core competencies, problem solving, and academic self-efficacy. Japan J Nurs. Sci. 13(1), 20–28 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Najjar, R.H., Lyman, B., Miehl, N.: Nursing students’ experiences with high-fidelity simulation. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Sch. 12(1), 27–35 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Basak, T., Unver, V., Moss, J., Watts, P., Gaioso, V.: Beginning and advanced students’ perceptions of the use of low- and high-fidelity mannequins in nursing simulation. Nurse Educ. Today 36, 37–43 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kable, A.K., Levett-Jones, T.L., Arthur, C., Reid-Searl, K., Humphreys, M., Morris, S., et al.: A cross-national study to objectively evaluate the quality of diverse simulation approaches for undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ. Pract. 28, 248–256 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vermeulen, J., Beeckman, K., Turcksin, R., Van Winkel, L., Gucciardo, L., Laubach, M., et al.: The experiences of last-year student midwives with high-fidelity perinatal simulation training: a qualitative descriptive study. Women Birth 30(3), 253–261 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Unver, V., Basak, T., Tastan, S., Kok, G., Guvenc, G., Demirtas, A., et al.: Analysis of the effects of high-fidelity simulation on nursing students’ perceptions of their preparedness for disasters. Int. Emerg. Nurs. 38, 3–9 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Expósito, J.S., Costa, C.L., Agea, J.L.D., Izquierdo, M.D.C., Rodríguez, D.J.: Socio-emotional competencies as predictors of performance of nursing students in simulated clinical practice. Nurse Educ. Pract. 32, 122–128 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ward, J.: The empathy enigma: does it still exist? Comparison of empathy using students and standardized actors. Nurse Educ. 41(3), 134–138 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dunnington, R.M.: The centricity of presence in scenario-based high fidelity human patient simulation: a model. Nurs. Sci. Q. 28(1), 64–73 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bradley, P.: The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med. Educ. 40(3), 254–262 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kirkman, T., Hall, C., Winston, R., Pierce, V.: Strategies for implementing a multiple patient simulation scenario. Nurse Educ. Today 64, 11–15 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fusco, N.M., Foltz-Ramos, K.: Measuring changes in pharmacy and nursing students’ perceptions following an interprofessional high-fidelity simulation experience. J. Interprofessional Care 32(5), 648–652 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bolesta, S., Chmil, J.V.: Interprofessional education among student health professionals using human patient simulation. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 78(5), 94 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sundler, A.J., Pettersson, A., Berglund, M.: Undergraduate nursing students’ experiences when examining nursing skills in clinical simulation laboratories with high-fidelity patient simulators: A phenomenological research study. Nurse Educ. Today 35(12), 1257–1261 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilaria Farina
    • 1
  • Albina Paterniani
    • 1
  • Giovanni Galeoto
    • 1
  • Milena Sorrentino
    • 1
  • AnnaRita Marucci
    • 1
  • Julita Sansoni
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Nursing Research Unit - Public Health and Infectious DiseaseSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations