扩展现实教育对护理和助产学学生解剖学、生理学和病理学知识的有效性：一项系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 3.3 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Nurse Education in Practice Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104343

Gen Aikawa , Tetsuharu Kawashima , Yuma Ota , Mayumi Watanabe , Ayako Nishimura , Hideaki Sakuramoto

{"title":"扩展现实教育对护理和助产学学生解剖学、生理学和病理学知识的有效性：一项系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Gen Aikawa , Tetsuharu Kawashima , Yuma Ota , Mayumi Watanabe , Ayako Nishimura , Hideaki Sakuramoto","doi":"10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This review determined the effectiveness of education based on extended reality (XR) for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>Understanding anatomy, physiology and pathology is essential for nursing and midwifery students. XR improves health science students’ anatomical knowledge more than traditional education; however, consistent findings regarding nursing and midwifery students remain lacking.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, CENTRAL and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on XR’s effectiveness for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education were identified. Pooled effect estimates related to knowledge and learning load were calculated. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We searched 619 references and identified 6 RCTs. Compared with traditional education, XR moderately positively affected post-education knowledge, but there was no significant difference (five trials; SMD = 1.04 [95 % CI: −0.25–2.33]). Regarding differences in knowledge pre- and post-education, XR showed a large positive effect (four trials; SMD = 5.86 [95 % CI: 2.48–9.25]) and exhibited a moderately significant negative effect on learning load (three trials; SMD = −0.45 [95 % CI: −0.75 to −0.14]). The certainty of evidence was “very low” and “low” for knowledge and learning load, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>XR use in nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education yielded a low learning load and effectively improved knowledge. Nevertheless, few studies were included in the meta-analysis, necessitating large RCTs</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48715,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education in Practice","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 104343"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of extended reality-based education on nursing and midwifery students’ knowledge of anatomy, physiology and pathology: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Gen Aikawa , Tetsuharu Kawashima , Yuma Ota , Mayumi Watanabe , Ayako Nishimura , Hideaki Sakuramoto\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104343\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This review determined the effectiveness of education based on extended reality (XR) for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>Understanding anatomy, physiology and pathology is essential for nursing and midwifery students. XR improves health science students’ anatomical knowledge more than traditional education; however, consistent findings regarding nursing and midwifery students remain lacking.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, CENTRAL and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on XR’s effectiveness for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education were identified. Pooled effect estimates related to knowledge and learning load were calculated. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We searched 619 references and identified 6 RCTs. Compared with traditional education, XR moderately positively affected post-education knowledge, but there was no significant difference (five trials; SMD = 1.04 [95 % CI: −0.25–2.33]). Regarding differences in knowledge pre- and post-education, XR showed a large positive effect (four trials; SMD = 5.86 [95 % CI: 2.48–9.25]) and exhibited a moderately significant negative effect on learning load (three trials; SMD = −0.45 [95 % CI: −0.75 to −0.14]). The certainty of evidence was “very low” and “low” for knowledge and learning load, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>XR use in nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education yielded a low learning load and effectively improved knowledge. Nevertheless, few studies were included in the meta-analysis, necessitating large RCTs</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nurse Education in Practice\",\"volume\":\"84 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nurse Education in Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147159532500099X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147159532500099X","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

摘要

目的探讨基于扩展现实（XR）的教学在护理助产学学生解剖、生理、病理教学中的效果。了解解剖学、生理学和病理学对护理和助产学的学生来说是必不可少的。XR比传统教育更能提高健康科学学生的解剖学知识；然而，关于护理和助产学学生的一致研究结果仍然缺乏。设计系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法检索MEDLINE、CINAHL、Web of Science、ERIC、CENTRAL和Igaku Chuo Zasshi数据库。所有关于XR在护理与助产学学生解剖、生理和病理教育中的有效性的随机对照试验（RCTs）均被确定。计算了与知识和学习负荷相关的汇总效应估计。采用建议分级评估、发展和评价方法评估证据的确定性。结果共检索文献619篇，纳入rct 6项。与传统教育相比，XR对教育后知识有中度正向影响，但无显著差异(5项试验；SMD = 1.04 [95% ci: - 0.25-2.33])。对于教育前后的知识差异，XR显示出较大的正效应(4个试验；SMD = 5.86 [95% CI: 2.48-9.25])，并对学习负荷表现出中度显著的负影响(三次试验；SMD =−0.45 [95% CI:−0.75 ~−0.14])。知识和学习负荷的证据确定性分别为“非常低”和“低”。结论xr应用于护理助产专业学生的解剖、生理、病理教学，学习负荷低，有效提高了知识水平。然而，meta分析中纳入的研究很少，因此需要进行大型随机对照试验

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Effectiveness of extended reality-based education on nursing and midwifery students’ knowledge of anatomy, physiology and pathology: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

This review determined the effectiveness of education based on extended reality (XR) for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education.

Background

Understanding anatomy, physiology and pathology is essential for nursing and midwifery students. XR improves health science students’ anatomical knowledge more than traditional education; however, consistent findings regarding nursing and midwifery students remain lacking.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, CENTRAL and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on XR’s effectiveness for nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education were identified. Pooled effect estimates related to knowledge and learning load were calculated. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Results

We searched 619 references and identified 6 RCTs. Compared with traditional education, XR moderately positively affected post-education knowledge, but there was no significant difference (five trials; SMD = 1.04 [95 % CI: −0.25–2.33]). Regarding differences in knowledge pre- and post-education, XR showed a large positive effect (four trials; SMD = 5.86 [95 % CI: 2.48–9.25]) and exhibited a moderately significant negative effect on learning load (three trials; SMD = −0.45 [95 % CI: −0.75 to −0.14]). The certainty of evidence was “very low” and “low” for knowledge and learning load, respectively.

Conclusion

XR use in nursing and midwifery students’ anatomy, physiology and pathology education yielded a low learning load and effectively improved knowledge. Nevertheless, few studies were included in the meta-analysis, necessitating large RCTs

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Nurse Education in Practice NURSING-

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

9.40%

发文量

180

审稿时长

51 days

期刊介绍： Nurse Education in Practice enables lecturers and practitioners to both share and disseminate evidence that demonstrates the actual practice of education as it is experienced in the realities of their respective work environments. It is supportive of new authors and will be at the forefront in publishing individual and collaborative papers that demonstrate the link between education and practice.