School of Nursing and Midwifery, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308, Australia.
Nurse Educ Pract. 2011 Nov;11(6):380-3. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2011.03.014. Epub 2011 Apr 9.
This paper describes a study that measured and compared knowledge acquisition in nursing students exposed to medium or high fidelity human patient simulation manikins.
In Australia and internationally the use of simulated learning environments has escalated. Simulation requires a significant investment of time and money and in a period of economic rationalisation this investment must be justified. Assessment of knowledge acquisition with multiple choice questions is the most common approach used to determine the effectiveness of simulation experiences.
This study was conducted in an Australian school of nursing; 84 third year nursing students participated. A quasi-experimental design was used to evaluate the effect of the level of manikin fidelity on knowledge acquisition. Data were collected at three points in time: prior to the simulation, immediately following and two weeks later.
Differences in mean scores between the control (medium fidelity) and experimental (high fidelity) groups for Tests 1, 2 and 3 were calculated using independent t tests and were not statistically significant. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to determine whether changes in knowledge scores occurred over time and, while an improvement in scores was observed, it was not statistically significant.
The results of this study raise questions about the value of investing in expensive simulation modalities when the increased costs associated with high fidelity manikins may not be justified by a concomitant increase learning outcomes. This study also suggests that multiple choice questions may not be the most appropriate measure of simulation effectiveness.
本文描述了一项研究,该研究测量并比较了接受中或高保真度人体模拟模型培训的护理学生的知识获取情况。
在澳大利亚和国际上,模拟学习环境的使用已经急剧增加。模拟需要大量的时间和资金投入,在经济合理化的时期,这种投资必须是合理的。使用多项选择题评估知识获取是确定模拟体验有效性的最常用方法。
本研究在澳大利亚的一所护理学校进行;共有 84 名三年级护理学生参与。采用准实验设计评估模拟模型逼真度对知识获取的影响。数据在三个时间点收集:模拟前、模拟后即刻和两周后。
使用独立 t 检验计算了控制组(中保真度)和实验组(高保真度)在测试 1、2 和 3 中的平均分数之间的差异,结果无统计学意义。协方差分析(ANCOVA)用于确定知识分数是否随时间变化而变化,虽然观察到分数有所提高,但无统计学意义。
本研究的结果对投资昂贵的模拟模式的价值提出了质疑,因为与高保真度模型相关的增加成本可能无法通过学习成果的相应增加来证明是合理的。本研究还表明,多项选择题可能不是衡量模拟效果的最适当措施。