Sałacińska Izabela, Trojnar Patrycja, Gebriné Krisztina Éles, Törő Viktória, Sárváry Attila, Więch Paweł
Faculty of Health Sciences and Psychology, Collegium Medicum, University of Rzeszów, Rzeszów, Poland.
Institute of Health Care, Academy of Applied Sciences, Przemyśl, Poland.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Feb 10;12:1523768. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1523768. eCollection 2025.
Medical simulation has become an integral part of medical student education. There is a limited body of literature comparing virtual and high-fidelity simulation in terms of effectiveness and student perception.
A total of 130 medical students at the University of Rzeszów participated in this cross-sectional study. The respondents were divided into two groups: students who completed a selected scenario using a virtual patient (Body Interact) and students who completed a scenario using traditional high-fidelity (manikin-based) simulation (HFS). After completing the scenario, students filled in the following questionnaires: the Simulation Design Scale (SDS), the Educational Practices Questionnaire (EPQ), the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale (SSCL) and a customized survey questionnaire.
The study found no significant difference in the effectiveness of HFS between students exposed to either type of simulation. Detailed analysis within specific categories - problem-solving, teamwork, and active learning - also showed no significant differences between virtual and traditional HFS. Furthermore, there were no notable differences between virtual and traditional simulations regarding specific aspects such as satisfaction with learning, self-confidence in learning, and expectations. However, within the virtual simulation group, females rated active learning significantly higher. Students aged 24-33 rated satisfaction with learning, self-confidence, overall effectiveness and perception of HFS, problem-solving, and active learning more favorably. Additionally, the levels of perceived effectiveness and satisfaction of higher years students with HFS increased.
Virtual patient simulation and traditional HFS foster the development of practical skills, as well as soft skills of medical students in challenging situations.
医学模拟已成为医学生教育不可或缺的一部分。在有效性和学生认知方面，比较虚拟模拟和高保真模拟的文献数量有限。
热舒夫大学的130名医学生参与了这项横断面研究。受访者分为两组：使用虚拟患者（Body Interact）完成选定场景的学生和使用传统高保真（基于人体模型）模拟（HFS）完成场景的学生。完成场景后，学生填写以下问卷：模拟设计量表（SDS）、教育实践问卷（EPQ）、学生学习满意度和自信心量表（SSCL）以及一份定制调查问卷。
研究发现，接触任何一种模拟的学生在高保真模拟的有效性方面没有显著差异。在特定类别（解决问题、团队合作和主动学习）内的详细分析也表明，虚拟模拟和传统高保真模拟之间没有显著差异。此外，在学习满意度、学习自信心和期望等特定方面，虚拟模拟和传统模拟之间也没有显著差异。然而，在虚拟模拟组中，女性对主动学习的评价明显更高。年龄在24 - 33岁的学生对学习满意度、自信心、高保真模拟的整体有效性和认知、解决问题能力以及主动学习的评价更高。此外，高年级学生对高保真模拟的感知有效性和满意度水平有所提高。
虚拟患者模拟和传统高保真模拟有助于培养医学生在具有挑战性情况下的实践技能以及软技能。
