TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Three Simulation-Based Teaching Methodologies for Emergency Response
AU - Arnold, Jacqueline J.
AU - Johnson, Le Ann M.
AU - Tucker, Sharon J.
AU - Chesak, Sherry S.
AU - Dierkhising, Ross A.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2013 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2013/3
Y1 - 2013/3
N2 - Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 3 simulation methodologies (low-fidelity, computer-based, and full-scale) on the outcomes of emergency response knowledge, confidence, satisfaction and self-confidence with learning, and performance. Additionally, interrater reliability was assessed for the Emergency Response Performance Tool (ERPT). Method: An experimental, pretest-posttest, control-group design was used to evaluate the effects of the 3 teaching methodologies. In all, 28 participants enrolled in a Critical Care Orientation program participated in the study. Each participant was randomized to 1 of the 3 groups. Participants completed pre- and posttest written examinations and confidence questionnaires, the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning instrument, and baseline and posttest performance assessments. Results: No significant differences were found among the 3 groups in emergency response knowledge, confidence, or performance. There were significant differences in participants' results on the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning instrument, with the full-scale simulation group rating the highest in satisfaction and self-confidence. The interrater reliability for the ERPT ranged from 0.58 to 1.0. Conclusions: Although the statistical findings did not support the hypothesis that critical care RNs who receive full-scale simulation training will score higher in knowledge, confidence, and performance, this study advances the current knowledge base of simulation-based education and research. The ERPT can be a reliable measure for assessing performance in full-scale simulation. However, further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.
AB - Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 3 simulation methodologies (low-fidelity, computer-based, and full-scale) on the outcomes of emergency response knowledge, confidence, satisfaction and self-confidence with learning, and performance. Additionally, interrater reliability was assessed for the Emergency Response Performance Tool (ERPT). Method: An experimental, pretest-posttest, control-group design was used to evaluate the effects of the 3 teaching methodologies. In all, 28 participants enrolled in a Critical Care Orientation program participated in the study. Each participant was randomized to 1 of the 3 groups. Participants completed pre- and posttest written examinations and confidence questionnaires, the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning instrument, and baseline and posttest performance assessments. Results: No significant differences were found among the 3 groups in emergency response knowledge, confidence, or performance. There were significant differences in participants' results on the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning instrument, with the full-scale simulation group rating the highest in satisfaction and self-confidence. The interrater reliability for the ERPT ranged from 0.58 to 1.0. Conclusions: Although the statistical findings did not support the hypothesis that critical care RNs who receive full-scale simulation training will score higher in knowledge, confidence, and performance, this study advances the current knowledge base of simulation-based education and research. The ERPT can be a reliable measure for assessing performance in full-scale simulation. However, further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.
KW - Computer based
KW - Confidence
KW - Critical care
KW - Emergency Response Performance Tool
KW - Emergency response
KW - Interrater reliability
KW - Knowledge
KW - Performance assessment
KW - Simulation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874295092&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874295092&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecns.2011.09.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ecns.2011.09.004
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84874295092
SN - 1876-1399
VL - 9
SP - e85-e93
JO - Clinical Simulation in Nursing
JF - Clinical Simulation in Nursing
IS - 3
ER -