Efficacy of simulation over live clinical rotations in nurse practitioner prenatal education: A retrospective cohort study

IF 3.4 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Clinical Simulation in Nursing Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1016/j.ecns.2024.101640

Diana I.G. Lithgow PhD, DNP, RN, FNP-BC, FAANP , Georgia Mueller Luckey PhD, MS , Khoa Dang DNP, APRN-CNP, FNP-C

{"title":"Efficacy of simulation over live clinical rotations in nurse practitioner prenatal education: A retrospective cohort study","authors":"Diana I.G. Lithgow PhD, DNP, RN, FNP-BC, FAANP , Georgia Mueller Luckey PhD, MS , Khoa Dang DNP, APRN-CNP, FNP-C","doi":"10.1016/j.ecns.2024.101640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Clinical simulations are often perceived by faculty as a substitute in the absence of live rotations in healthcare training, rather than the primary medium. This study aimed to evaluate efficacy of prenatal simulations by comparing prenatal exam outcomes when students experienced live prenatal clinicals to competency exam outcomes when students experienced simulation prenatal clinical only.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>A retrospective cohort study was used to examine data collected before and after simulation-based training that substituted for live clinical training with Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) students. Data was collected from FNP nursing student scores on a predictor national certification exam in the prenatal category between 2015 and 2022 (4 years prior to and 4 years during simulation clinicals).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>During live clinical rotations, the average Prenatal Score was 66.4, and during simulation clinicals, the average Prenatal Score increased to 78.2. There was a significant difference in the average Prenatal Scores (<em>p</em> < .0001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Case-based simulation experiences in prenatal clinical training improved student scores in the prenatal category within the predictor national certification exam taken by FNP students.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48753,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Simulation in Nursing","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 101640"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Simulation in Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876139924001324","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Clinical simulations are often perceived by faculty as a substitute in the absence of live rotations in healthcare training, rather than the primary medium. This study aimed to evaluate efficacy of prenatal simulations by comparing prenatal exam outcomes when students experienced live prenatal clinicals to competency exam outcomes when students experienced simulation prenatal clinical only.

Method

A retrospective cohort study was used to examine data collected before and after simulation-based training that substituted for live clinical training with Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) students. Data was collected from FNP nursing student scores on a predictor national certification exam in the prenatal category between 2015 and 2022 (4 years prior to and 4 years during simulation clinicals).

Results

During live clinical rotations, the average Prenatal Score was 66.4, and during simulation clinicals, the average Prenatal Score increased to 78.2. There was a significant difference in the average Prenatal Scores (p < .0001).

Conclusions

Case-based simulation experiences in prenatal clinical training improved student scores in the prenatal category within the predictor national certification exam taken by FNP students.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在执业护士产前教育中，模拟临床轮转比现场临床轮转更有效：回顾性队列研究

背景在医疗保健培训中，临床模拟通常被教师视为缺乏现场轮转时的替代品，而非主要媒介。本研究旨在通过比较学生经历现场产前临床和仅经历模拟产前临床时的产前检查结果，评估产前模拟的功效。方法采用回顾性队列研究，检查家庭护士（FNP）学生在模拟培训替代现场临床培训前后收集的数据。数据收集自 FNP 护理学生在 2015 年至 2022 年（模拟临床前 4 年和模拟临床期间 4 年）产前类别预测性国家认证考试中的分数。结果在现场临床轮转期间，平均产前分数为 66.4，而在模拟临床期间，平均产前分数增至 78.2。结论在产前临床培训中基于案例的模拟经验提高了全科医生学生在预测性国家认证考试中产前类别的分数。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical Simulation in Nursing NURSING-

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

15.40%

发文量

107

期刊介绍： Clinical Simulation in Nursing is an international, peer reviewed journal published online monthly. Clinical Simulation in Nursing is the official journal of the International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation & Learning (INACSL) and reflects its mission to advance the science of healthcare simulation. We will review and accept articles from other health provider disciplines, if they are determined to be of interest to our readership. The journal accepts manuscripts meeting one or more of the following criteria: Research articles and literature reviews (e.g. systematic, scoping, umbrella, integrative, etc.) about simulation Innovative teaching/learning strategies using simulation Articles updating guidelines, regulations, and legislative policies that impact simulation Leadership for simulation Simulation operations Clinical and academic uses of simulation.