Simulation Curriculum Development, Integration, and Operations

Lioce, Lori; Lanz, Amelia S.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15378-6_7

Cited by 19 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Technology‐enhanced simulation encompasses both synthetic modalities (e.g., manikins, task trainers) as well as organic modalities (e.g., cadavers, live animals, animal parts) 19 . We found nine studies that compared synthetic simulation modalities versus organic simulation modalities.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In simulation education there are typically learners who actively participate in the simulated environment and experience “a representation of a real event.” 19 However, often there are also learners that observe the simulation without active participation. Four studies compared active participation versus observation of technology‐enhanced simulation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We included studies that evaluated technology‐enhanced simulation, including “tools [such as] robotic and static manikins, partial task trainers, cadavers, live animals or animal parts, and computer‐based virtual reality simulators” 4 and hybrid simulations (a combination of two or more modalities of simulation aiming to provide a more realistic experience) 19 . We included comparative studies that evaluated technology‐enhanced simulation for EM health professionals, either via comparisons of two simulation‐based activities or via a simulation activity compared with a nonsimulation alternative (e.g., lecture, small‐group session, human‐simulated participant).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: Updated systematic review and meta‐analysis 1991–2021

Hildreth

Maggio

Iteen

et al. 2023

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Over the past decade, the use of technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine (EM) education has grown, yet we still lack a clear understanding of its effectiveness. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesize studies evaluating the comparative effectiveness of technology‐enhanced simulation in EM. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify EM simulation research that compares technology‐enhanced simulation with other instructional modalities. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion and abstracted information on learners, clinical topics, instructional design features, outcomes, cost, and study quality. Standardized mean difference (SMD) effect sizes were pooled using random effects. Results We identified 60 studies, enrolling at least 5279 learners. Of these, 23 compared technology‐enhanced simulation with another instructional modality (e.g., living humans, lecture, small group), and 37 compared two forms of technology‐enhanced simulation. Compared to lecture or small groups, we found simulation to have nonsignificant differences for time skills (SMD 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.23 to 0.89, n = 3), but a large, significant effect for non–time skills (SMD 0.82, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.46, n = 8). Comparison of alternative types of technology‐enhanced simulation found favorable associations with skills acquisition, of moderate magnitude, for computer‐assisted guidance (compared to no computer‐assisted guidance), for time skills (SMD 0.50, 95% CI −1.66 to 2.65, n = 2) and non–time skills (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, n = 6), and for more task repetitions (time skills SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.86, n = 2) and active participation (compared to observation) for time skills (SMD 0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.45, n = 2) and non–time skills (SMD 0.33 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58, n = 3). Conclusions Technology‐enhanced simulation is effective for EM learners for skills acquisition. Features such as computer‐assisted guidance, repetition, and active learning are associated with greater effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: Updated systematic review and meta‐analysis 1991–2021

Hildreth

Maggio

Iteen

et al. 2023

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When the participants are apart from each other, telesimulation is an option to provide simulation-based learning 1 . Telesimulation is the implementation of simulation training from a physical distance of the participants 2 . Debriefing is a reflection process that accompanies simulation-based learning and re-examines what happened to enhance abilities or behaviors in later situations 3…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Can Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare? Different Perspectives on Teledebriefing Assessments

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionVirtual debriefing is a cardinal element to achieve the effectiveness of telesimulation. There are different instruments to assess face-to-face debriefing to determine the degree of effectiveness of debriefing; Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) instrument is one of them. This study aims to describe and compare the evaluation of raters, instructors, and students during a virtual debriefing using the DASH.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed evaluating the virtual debriefing of 30 instructors after a heart failure telesimulation scenario. The evaluation was conducted by 30 instructors, 338 undergraduate students in the seventh semester, and 7 simulation raters. The 3 versions of the DASH instrument in Spanish were applied, respectively.ResultsTwo comparisons were made, student versus instructor and rater versus instructor. Cronbach α was 0.97 for each version. The averages of the results on the DASH instrument were: 6.61 (3.34–7.0), 5.95 (4.65–7.0), and 4.84 (2.68–6.02) for student, rater, and instructor versions, respectively. The size effect between student and debriefer perspectives was 0.42. In contrast, the size effect between instructor and rater was 0.72. All differences were significant.ConclusionsThere are different rates between the persons who use the DASH. In this study, from the perspective of the instructor and rater, the difference was 1 point with a wide range, in contrast with the difference between instructor and student, which is relatively minor. It is necessary to consider the perspectives of experts in the subject to achieve a virtual debriefing of high quality and improve a debriefing by using the DASH.

show abstract

“…High-fidelity human patient simulators with full body manikin and advanced technology mimicking human anatomy and physiological signs expressed via monitors have been used in nursing simulations 1 . Given their diverse features, learners can practice making decisions according to the data collected (eg, vital signs and breathing sounds) 2,3 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing a Mixed Simulation With 360° Virtual Reality and a High-Fidelity Simulator

Kim

Lee

2022

CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virtual reality technology has been adopted to overcome barriers of conventional simulation. This study was conducted to determine the impact of mixed simulation (a 360° virtual reality and a high-fidelity simulator) on learning how to provide nursing care for patients with arrhythmia. A total of 49 students were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 25) and control (n = 23) groups. They were given four arrhythmia cases with a 360° virtual reality system first followed by a manikin-based simulation. The mixed simulation group showed greater improvement in knowledge, higher decision-making competency in “knowing and acting” (P = .025) and “seeking information from instructors” (P = .049), and lower anxiety in “using resources to gather information” (P = .031). Study participants achieved a good level of empathy (3.28 ± 0.72) and liked the program (4.56 ± 0.60). They were satisfied with the program (4.48 ± 0.65). These findings provide new insight into learning through blending of new technology. When the 360° virtual reality was used with existing manikin-based simulation, they effectively reinforced one another. The 360° virtual reality can be an effective strategy to ensure active participation to gain a comprehensive understanding of and empathy for patients.

show abstract

Simulation Curriculum Development, Integration, and Operations

Cited by 19 publications

References 10 publications

Technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: Updated systematic review and meta‐analysis 1991–2021

Technology‐enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: Updated systematic review and meta‐analysis 1991–2021

Who Can Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare? Different Perspectives on Teledebriefing Assessments

Constructing a Mixed Simulation With 360° Virtual Reality and a High-Fidelity Simulator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About