Comparing the effectiveness of immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity simulations in mechanical ventilator nursing education: A randomized crossover design

IF 2.5 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Clinical Simulation in Nursing Pub Date : 2025-06-27 DOI:10.1016/j.ecns.2025.101769

Sunah Park

{"title":"Comparing the effectiveness of immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity simulations in mechanical ventilator nursing education: A randomized crossover design","authors":"Sunah Park","doi":"10.1016/j.ecns.2025.101769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Virtual platforms offer an effective solution to replace or complement traditional training methods by facilitating flexible learning focused on knowledge and nursing practice.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A randomized, crossover design study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of immersive virtual simulation (IVS) and high-fidelity simulation (HFS) in mechanical ventilator nursing education. Thirty-two fourth-year nursing students in South Korea were randomly assigned to the Sequence 1 (IVS followed by HFS; <em>n</em> = 16) and 2 (HFS followed by IVS; <em>n</em> = 16) groups. Outcome measures included knowledge acquisition, confidence in nursing practice, learning engagement, learning satisfaction and self-confidence, and clinical learning environment perceptions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Knowledge acquisition showed no significant differences between IVS and HFS educational approaches. However, confidence in nursing practice increased significantly following IVS education compared to HFS education. Similarly, learning engagement, satisfaction, and self-confidence were significantly higher after IVS education than HFS education.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These findings suggest that IVS education for mechanical ventilator nursing education for nursing students can serve as an effective hands-on training methodology to enhance critical care nursing competency.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48753,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Simulation in Nursing","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 101769"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","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/S1876139925000866","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

Virtual platforms offer an effective solution to replace or complement traditional training methods by facilitating flexible learning focused on knowledge and nursing practice.

Methods

A randomized, crossover design study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of immersive virtual simulation (IVS) and high-fidelity simulation (HFS) in mechanical ventilator nursing education. Thirty-two fourth-year nursing students in South Korea were randomly assigned to the Sequence 1 (IVS followed by HFS; n = 16) and 2 (HFS followed by IVS; n = 16) groups. Outcome measures included knowledge acquisition, confidence in nursing practice, learning engagement, learning satisfaction and self-confidence, and clinical learning environment perceptions.

Results

Knowledge acquisition showed no significant differences between IVS and HFS educational approaches. However, confidence in nursing practice increased significantly following IVS education compared to HFS education. Similarly, learning engagement, satisfaction, and self-confidence were significantly higher after IVS education than HFS education.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that IVS education for mechanical ventilator nursing education for nursing students can serve as an effective hands-on training methodology to enhance critical care nursing competency.

查看原文本刊更多论文

沉浸式虚拟仿真与高保真仿真在机械呼吸机护理教学中的效果比较：随机交叉设计

虚拟平台通过促进以知识和护理实践为重点的灵活学习，为取代或补充传统培训方法提供了有效的解决方案。方法采用随机交叉设计研究，比较沉浸式虚拟仿真（IVS）与高保真仿真（HFS）在机械呼吸机护理教学中的效果。32名韩国四年级护理专业学生被随机分配到序列1 (IVS)，随后是HFS；n = 16)和2 (HFS后IVS；N = 16)组。结果测量包括知识获取、护理实践信心、学习参与、学习满意度和自信以及临床学习环境感知。结果两种教育方式的知识获取差异无统计学意义。然而，与HFS教育相比，IVS教育后护理实践的信心显著增加。同样，IVS教育后的学习投入、满意度和自信心显著高于HFS教育。结论对护生进行机械呼吸机护理教育，可作为一种有效的实践训练方法，提高危重护理能力。

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.