Comparing Intravenous Insertion Instructional Methods with Haptic Simulators.

IF 2.2 Q1 NURSING
Nursing Research and Practice Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-01-29 DOI:10.1155/2017/4685157
Lenora A McWilliams, Ann Malecha
{"title":"Comparing Intravenous Insertion Instructional Methods with Haptic Simulators.","authors":"Lenora A McWilliams,&nbsp;Ann Malecha","doi":"10.1155/2017/4685157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Objective</i>. The objective of this review was to compare traditional intravenous (IV) insertion instructional methods with the use of haptic IV simulators. <i>Design</i>. An integrative research design was used to analyze the current literature. <i>Data Sources</i>. A search was conducted using key words intravenous (IV) insertion or cannulation or venipuncture and simulation from 2000 to 2015 in the English language. The databases included Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Complete, Education Resource Information Center, and Medline. <i>Review Methods</i>. Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) strategies were used to critique the articles for themes and similarities. <i>Results</i>. Comparisons of outcomes between traditional IV instructional methods and the use of haptic IV simulators continue to show various results. Positive results indicate that the use of the haptic IV simulator decreases both band constriction and total procedure time. While students are satisfied with practicing on the haptic simulators, they still desire faculty involvement. <i>Conclusion</i>. Combining the haptic IV simulator with practical experience on the IV arm may be the best practice for learning IV insertion. Research employing active learning strategies while using a haptic IV simulator during the learning process may reduce cost and faculty time.</p>","PeriodicalId":46917,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Research and Practice","volume":"2017 ","pages":"4685157"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/4685157","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4685157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Objective. The objective of this review was to compare traditional intravenous (IV) insertion instructional methods with the use of haptic IV simulators. Design. An integrative research design was used to analyze the current literature. Data Sources. A search was conducted using key words intravenous (IV) insertion or cannulation or venipuncture and simulation from 2000 to 2015 in the English language. The databases included Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Complete, Education Resource Information Center, and Medline. Review Methods. Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) strategies were used to critique the articles for themes and similarities. Results. Comparisons of outcomes between traditional IV instructional methods and the use of haptic IV simulators continue to show various results. Positive results indicate that the use of the haptic IV simulator decreases both band constriction and total procedure time. While students are satisfied with practicing on the haptic simulators, they still desire faculty involvement. Conclusion. Combining the haptic IV simulator with practical experience on the IV arm may be the best practice for learning IV insertion. Research employing active learning strategies while using a haptic IV simulator during the learning process may reduce cost and faculty time.

静脉插入教学方法与触觉模拟器的比较。
目标。本综述的目的是比较传统的静脉(IV)插入教学方法与使用触觉IV模拟器。设计。采用综合研究设计对现有文献进行分析。数据源。以2000 - 2015年的英文关键词静脉(IV)插入或插管或静脉穿刺和模拟进行检索。数据库包括Academic Search Complete、CINAHL Complete、Education Resource Information Center和Medline。复习方法。Whittemore和Knafl(2005)的策略被用于评论文章的主题和相似性。结果。比较传统的静脉注射教学方法和使用触觉静脉注射模拟器的结果继续显示不同的结果。积极的结果表明,使用触觉IV模拟器减少了带收缩和总手术时间。虽然学生们对在触觉模拟器上的练习感到满意,但他们仍然希望教师参与其中。结论。将触觉IV模拟器与IV臂的实际经验相结合可能是学习IV插入的最佳实践。研究采用主动学习策略,同时在学习过程中使用触觉IV模拟器可以减少成本和教师时间。
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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信