Frangi Duccio, Bardacci Yari, Magi Camilla Elena, El Aoufy Khadija, Longobucco Yari, Iovino Paolo, Amato Carla, Balestri Chiara, Forciniti Carolina, Rasero Laura, Iozzo Pasquale, Lucchini Alberto, Bambi Stefano
Intensive Rehabilitation Unit, IRCCS Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation, Florence, Italy.
Department of Emergency, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 17;15(7):e099968. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-099968.
This scoping review aims to assess low-cost simulation methods used in nursing education, evaluating how they balance educational effectiveness with budget constraints.
Scoping review conducted in accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines.
PubMed, Embase and CINAHL were systematically searched for relevant studies published between January 2000 and October 2023.
We included peer-reviewed primary studies involving nurses or nursing students, focused on the use of low-cost simulation in any healthcare setting. Studies had to describe the simulation strategy and its educational application.
Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data using a standardised form. Findings were synthesised narratively and categorised by type of simulation, educational context and competencies addressed.
Out of 3332 records, 39 studies met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies covered various clinical areas, including critical care, emergency, neonatal, paediatric and obstetric nursing, as well as transversal competencies such as communication and clinical reasoning. Low-cost methods included task trainers, mannequins, computer-based tools, hybrid models and serious games. Only 38% of studies reported detailed cost information.
Low-cost simulation offers promising opportunities in nursing education but suffers from inconsistent cost reporting and a lack of standardisation. Further research is needed to evaluate its long-term effectiveness and support broader implementation.
本综述旨在评估护理教育中使用的低成本模拟方法，评估它们如何在教育效果与预算限制之间取得平衡。
根据阿克西和奥马利的方法框架以及系统评价和Meta分析扩展的首选报告项目进行综述报告指南进行范围综述。
对PubMed、Embase和CINAHL进行系统检索，以查找2000年1月至2023年10月期间发表的相关研究。
我们纳入了涉及护士或护理学生的同行评审的原始研究，重点是在任何医疗环境中使用低成本模拟。研究必须描述模拟策略及其教育应用。
两名评审员独立筛选标题、摘要和全文，并使用标准化表格提取数据。研究结果以叙述方式进行综合，并按模拟类型、教育背景和所涉及的能力进行分类。
在3332条记录中，39项研究符合纳入标准。所审查的研究涵盖了各个临床领域，包括重症护理、急诊、新生儿、儿科和产科护理，以及沟通和临床推理等横向能力。低成本方法包括任务训练器、人体模型、计算机工具、混合模型和严肃游戏。只有38%的研究报告了详细的成本信息。
低成本模拟在护理教育中提供了有前景的机会，但存在成本报告不一致和缺乏标准化的问题。需要进一步研究以评估其长期效果并支持更广泛的实施。
