Ferreira Julia Messina Gonzaga, Generoso José Roberto, Marra Alexandre R, Deliberato Rodrigo Octávio, Dewan Maya, Loeb Daniel, Real Francis, Collins Kelly, Ely Kelly, Zackoff Matthew, Lopes Gabriel de Oliveira Vasques, Pardo Isabele, Gutfreund Maria Celidonio, Callado Gustavo Yano, Mendonça Eneida A
Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Division of Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States.
J Gen Intern Med. 2025 Sep 19. doi: 10.1007/s11606-025-09794-y.
Simulation-based training is essential for enhancing healthcare education and patient safety. However, its implementation often requires significant financial investment, limiting access in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Adapting simulation techniques to low-cost alternatives could improve accessibility and reduce educational disparities across global settings. This review aims to synthesize evidence on low-cost, technology-enhanced educational tools for healthcare training in resource-constrained settings.
We searched Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase until August 31, 2024. Eligible studies involved LMICs, health trainees, and low-cost, technology-enhanced simulation tools for resource-constrained settings. We excluded comments, reviews, editorials, and studies not meeting these criteria. The review followed PRISMA guidelines, and study quality was assessed via the Downs and Black scale. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024554815) and received no funding.
A total of 13 studies were included: six randomized trials and seven nonrandomized trials. These studies assessed various learning tools, including smartphone apps (six), virtual or augmented reality (three), telesimulation (two), a virtual simulation website (one), and a high-fidelity simulator (one), across multiple healthcare disciplines. Most studies have reported positive learning outcomes, such as improved skills and knowledge, although none have assessed long-term behavioral changes or patient outcomes. The reported barriers included internet connectivity issues, software instability, language limitations, and variability in prior knowledge. User satisfaction was generally high.
This review highlights scalable, technological simulation tools for LMICs that improve medical training in resource-limited settings. It adheres to PRISMA guidelines, ensuring rigor, and includes studies from multiple continents and healthcare disciplines. Limitations include variations in low-cost tool definitions, study quality, and a lack of long-term behavior or clinical impact assessment. Additionally, comparisons often involve traditional learning methods rather than high-fidelity simulation tools used in high-income countries, and no cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted.
基于模拟的培训对于加强医疗保健教育和患者安全至关重要。然而,其实施通常需要大量资金投入,这限制了低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)的获取机会。使模拟技术适应低成本替代方案可以提高可及性,并减少全球范围内的教育差距。本综述旨在综合关于资源受限环境下用于医疗培训的低成本、技术增强型教育工具的证据。
我们检索了Medline(PubMed)、CINAHL、Cochrane CENTRAL、Web of Science、Scopus和Embase,检索截止至2024年8月31日。符合条件的研究涉及低收入和中等收入国家、卫生专业学员以及适用于资源受限环境的低成本、技术增强型模拟工具。我们排除了评论、综述、社论以及不符合这些标准的研究。本综述遵循PRISMA指南,并通过唐斯和布莱克量表评估研究质量。本研究已在PROSPERO(CRD42024554815)上注册,未获得资助。
共纳入13项研究:6项随机试验和7项非随机试验。这些研究评估了多种学习工具,包括智能手机应用程序(6项)、虚拟现实或增强现实(3项)、远程模拟(2项)、虚拟模拟网站(1项)和高保真模拟器(1项),涉及多个医疗保健学科。大多数研究报告了积极的学习成果,如技能和知识的提高,尽管没有一项研究评估长期行为变化或患者结局。报告的障碍包括互联网连接问题、软件不稳定、语言限制以及先验知识的差异。用户满意度总体较高。
本综述强调了适用于低收入和中等收入国家的可扩展技术模拟工具,这些工具可改善资源有限环境下的医学培训。它遵循PRISMA指南,确保严谨性,并纳入了来自多个大洲和医疗保健学科的研究。局限性包括低成本工具定义的差异、研究质量以及缺乏长期行为或临床影响评估。此外,比较通常涉及传统学习方法,而非高收入国家使用的高保真模拟工具,且未进行成本效益分析。