Arslan Sümeyye, Kuzu Kurban Nevin, Takmak Şenay, Şanlialp Zeyrek Arife, Öztik Sinem, Şenol Hande
Faculty of Health Sciences, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Kütahya Health Sciences University, Kütahya, Turkey.
J Clin Nurs. 2022 Mar;31(5-6):483-496. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15960. Epub 2021 Jul 13.
Peripheral intravenous catheterisation (PIVC) is a complex procedure.
This study reviewed studies evaluating the effects of different simulators in comparison with traditional methods used in PIVC training for nursing students and hospital nurses.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised (RCT) and non-randomised controlled (N-RCT) studies.
MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, ERIC, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect were searched using PIVC, simulation and nursing education. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system; the risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 (for RCTs) and A Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for N-RCTs. The study was conducted as per the PRISMA guidelines.
In total, 2,812 records were identified, and 12 studies published between 2002 and 2018 were finally included. Most studies included Virtual IV simulator and the plastic IV arm model in PIVC training for hospital nurses and nursing students, reported on outcomes such as PIVC-related knowledge, skills, confidence, state/trait anxiety and satisfaction. Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis, the effect sizes for all the outcomes ranged from small to moderate. However, the effect sizes were non-significant for all outcomes. The quality of evidence was assessed as being low for skills, knowledge, satisfaction, and trait/state anxiety, and moderate for confidence.
The effect of Virtual IV training on PIVC-related skills, knowledge, satisfaction and anxiety among nursing students and hospital nurses, in comparison with the plastic arm training method, remains unclear. However, Virtual IV training was found to increase PIVC confidence.
There is a small effect in favour of VR in PIVC education although non-significant. More evidence is needed to determine the superiority of simulation methods. In PIVC training of nurses and nursing students, hospitals and schools can choose a method in accordance with their resources.
PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019124599.
外周静脉置管（PIVC）是一个复杂的操作过程。
本研究回顾了评估不同模拟器与护理专业学生和医院护士PIVC培训中使用的传统方法相比的效果的研究。
对随机对照试验（RCT）和非随机对照试验（N-RCT）进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
使用PIVC、模拟和护理教育在MEDLINE、Cochrane、Scopus、ERIC、科学网和ScienceDirect中进行检索。使用GRADE系统评估证据质量；使用RoB 2（用于RCT）和Cochrane非随机对照试验偏倚风险评估工具评估偏倚风险。本研究按照PRISMA指南进行。
共识别出2812条记录，最终纳入了2002年至2018年发表的12项研究。大多数研究在医院护士和护理专业学生的PIVC培训中纳入了虚拟静脉模拟器和塑料静脉手臂模型，报告了与PIVC相关的知识、技能、信心、状态/特质焦虑和满意度等结果。7项研究纳入荟萃分析，所有结果的效应大小范围从小到中等。然而，所有结果的效应大小均无统计学意义。技能方面、知识、满意度和特质/状态焦虑方面的证据质量评估为低，信心方面为中等。
与塑料手臂训练方法相比，虚拟静脉培训对护理专业学生和医院护士与PIVC相关的技能、知识、满意度和焦虑的影响仍不明确。然而，发现虚拟静脉培训可提高PIVC信心。
在PIVC教育中，虽然支持虚拟现实的效果不显著，但有一个小的效果。需要更多证据来确定模拟方法的优越性。在护士和护理专业学生的PIVC培训中，医院和学校可以根据自身资源选择一种方法。
PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019124599。
