İnmeli Hastaya Yönelik Çevre Güvenliği Öğretiminde İki Farklı Simülasyon Uygulamasının Öğrenci Stres, Özgüven ve Memnuniyetine Etkisi

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 48 - 56, 08.04.2020

Elif Ateş Vesile Ünver Bahire Ulus

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışma, inmeli hastaya yönelik çevre güvenliği öğretiminde kullanılan iki farklı simülasyon uygulamasının hemşirelik öğrencilerinin, özgüven, memnuniyet, bilgi düzeyi ve stres algısı üzerine etkisini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Araştırma, randomize kontrollü, ön test-son test, karma tasarım kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmaya 62 öğrenci katılmıştır (kontrol grubu, n=31 ve deney grubu, n=31). Manken ile uygulama yapan öğrenciler çalışmanın kontrol, standart hasta ile uygulama yapanlar ise deney grubunu oluşturmuştur.
Bulgular: Standardize hasta grubundaki öğrencilerin sırasıyla memnuniyet ve özgüven puanları manken grubundaki öğrencilere göre daha yüksek ve aralarındaki farkın istatiksel olarak anlamlı olduğu saptandı (p=0.01; p=0.04). Bilgi düzeyleri açısından her iki grup için pre-test ve post-test puanları açısından fark saptanmadı (p>0.05). Bununla birlikte grup içi karşılaştırmada, kontrol grubundaki öğrencilerin pre-test ve post-test puanları arasında anlamlı bir fark saptandı. Öğrencilerin stres algıları, stres kaynakları ve stres yönetimi olarak iki ana tema altında analiz edildi.
Sonuç: Standardize hasta ile uygulama yapmak öğrencilerin memnuniyet ve özgüvenlerini daha artırmaktadır. Bununla birlikte her iki simülasyon uygulamasının öğrencilerin bilgi düzeyleri açısından bir fark oluşturmadığı saptandı. Simülasyon uygulamasının öğrencilerde stres oluşturduğu ancak iyi organize olmanın stres yönetiminde etkili olduğu bulunmuştur

Keywords

evre güvenliği, eğitim, hemşirelik öğrencileri, simülasyon

Effect of Two Different Simulation Modalities in Environmental Safety Teaching for Stroke Patients on Nursing Students’ Stress, Self-Confidence and Satisfaction

Abstract

Aim: This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of two different simulation modalities used in environmental safety teaching for stroke patients on self-confidence, satisfaction, knowledge scores and stress perception in nursing students.
Material and Methods: The study design was randomized controlled, pre-post-test, mixed-method design. Sixty-two students participated in the study. The students practicing with mannequin formed the control group and those practicing with the standardized patient formed the experimental group (mannequin group: n=31 and standardized patient group: n=31).
Results: Satisfaction and self-confidence scores of the students in standardized patient group were higher than the mannequin group and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.01; p=0.04). No significant difference was found between pre-test and post-test scores between the two groups in terms of knowledge levels (p> 0.05). However, in-group comparison, there was a significant difference between the pre and post-test scores of the students in the mannequin group. Stress perceptions of the students were analyzed under two main themes: sources of stress and stress management.
Conclusions: Standardized patient simulation increases the satisfaction and self-confidence of the students. However, it was found that both simulation modalities did not make a difference in terms of students’ knowledge level. It was determined that usage of simulation in environmental safety teaching for stroke patients was found to cause stress in students, but being well organized was effective in stress management.

Keywords

Education, environmental safety, nursing students, safety, simulation

References

• 1. Kamalakannan S, Gudlavalleti ASV, Gudlavalleti VSM, Goenka S, Kuper H. Incidence & prevalence of stroke in India: A systematic review. Indian Journal of Medical Research. 2017;146(2):175.
• 2. Di Carlo A, Lamassa M, Franceschini M, Bovis F, Cecconi L, Pournajaf S, et al. Impact of acute-phase complications and interventions on 6-month survival after stroke. A prospective observational study. Plos One. 2018;13(3):e0194786.
• 3. Bentes C, Martins H, Peralta AR, Casimiro C, Morgado C, Franco AC, et al. Post-stroke seizures are clinically underestimated. Journal of Neurology. 2017;264(9):1978-85.
• 4. Sendir M, Dogan P. Hemşirelik eğitiminde simülasyonun kullanımı: sistematik inceleme. Florence Nightingale Hemşirelik Dergisi. 2015;23(1):49-56.
• 5. Lapkin S, Levett-Jones T, Bellchambers H, Fernandez R. Effectiveness of patient simulation manikins in teaching clinical reasoning skills to undergraduate nursing students: A systematic review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2010;6(6):207-22.
• 6. Laschinger S, Medves J, Pulling C, McGraw R, Waytuck B, Harrison MB, et al. Effectiveness of simulation on health profession students' knowledge, skills, confidence and satisfaction. International Journal of Evidence‐Based Healthcare. 2008;6(3):278-302.
• 7. Kneebone R, Kidd J, Nestel D, Asvall S, Paraskeva P, Darzi A. An innovative model for teaching and learning clinical procedures. Medical Education. 2002;36(7):628-34.
• 8. Hravnak M, Beach M, Tuite P. Simulator technology as a tool for education in cardiac care. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2007;22(1):16-24.
• 9. Kim JK, Dotson B, Thomas S, Nelson KC. Standardized patient identification and specimen labeling: a retrospective analysis on improving patient safety. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2013;68(1):53-6.
• 10. Pfeiffer CA, Palley JE, Harrington KL. Impact of the Site Specialty of a Continuity Practice on Students' Clinical Skills: Performance With Standardized Patients. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 2010;22(3):191-5.
• 11. Robinson-Smith G, Bradley PK, Meakim C. Evaluating the use of standardized patients in undergraduate psychiatric nursing experiences. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2009;5(6):203-11.
• 12. Daniels K, Arafeh J, Clark A, Waller S, Druzin M, Chueh J. Prospective randomized trial of simulation versus didactic teaching for obstetrical emergencies. Simulation in Healthcare. 2010;5(1):40-5.
• 13. Becker KL, Rose LE, Berg JB, Park H, Shatzer JH. The teaching effectiveness of standardized patients. Journal of Nursing Education. 2006;45(4).
• 14. Swanson EA, Nicholson AC, Boese TA, Cram E, Stineman AM, Tew K. Comparison of selected teaching strategies incorporating simulation and student outcomes. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2011;7(3):81-90.
• 15. Aqel AA, Ahmad MM. High‐Fidelity Simulation Effects on CPR Knowledge, Skills, Acquisition, and Retention in Nursing Students. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing. 2014;11(6):394-400.
• 16. Curran V, Fleet L, White S, Bessell C, Deshpandey A, Drover A, et al. A randomized controlled study of manikin simulator fidelity on neonatal resuscitation program learning outcomes. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2015;20(1):205-18.
• 17. Ortiz N, Pedrogo Y, Bonet N. Integration of high‐fidelity simulator in third‐year paediatrics clerkship. The Clinical Teacher. 2011;8(2):105-108.
• 18. Wallace D, Gillett B, Wright B, Stetz J, Arquilla B. Randomized controlled trial of high fidelity patient simulators compared to actor patients in a pandemic influenza drill scenario. Resuscitation. 2010;81(7):872-6.
• 19. Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2012;40(8):795-805.
• 20. McRae ME, Chan A, Hulett R, Lee AJ, Coleman B. The effectiveness of and satisfaction with high-fidelity simulation to teach cardiac surgical resuscitation skills to nurses. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing. 2017;40:64-9.
• 21. Omer T. Nursing Students' Perceptions of Satisfaction and Self-Confidence with Clinical Simulation Experience. Journal of Education and Practice. 2016;7(5):131-8.
• 22. Lubbers J, Rossman C. Satisfaction and self-confidence with nursing clinical simulation: Novice learners, medium-fidelity, and community settings. Nurse Education Today. 2017;48:140-4.
• 23. Lubbers J, Rossman C. The effects of pediatric community simulation experience on the self-confidence and satisfaction of baccalaureate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Education Today. 2016;39:93-8.
• 24. Zapko KA, Ferranto MLG, Blasiman R, Shelestak D. Evaluating best educational practices, student satisfaction, and self-confidence in simulation: A descriptive study. Nurse Education Today. 2018;60:28-34.
• 25. Woodruff K, O'neill SP, Walton-Moss BJ. Exploring APN Students’ Perceptions, Self-Confidence, and Satisfaction With Clinical Simulation. Nursing Education Perspectives. 2017;38(6):347-9.
• 26. Kim J, Park JH, Shin S. Effectiveness of simulation-based nursing education depending on fidelity: a meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education. 2016;16(1):152.
• 27. Ignacio J, Dolmans D, Scherpbier A, Rethans JJ, Chan S, Liaw SY. Comparison of standardized patients with high-fidelity simulators for managing stress and improving performance in clinical deterioration: A mixed methods study. Nurse Education Today. 2015;35(12):1161-8.
• 28. Gillett B, Peckler B, Sinert R, Onkst C, Nabors S, Issley S, et al. Simulation in a disaster drill: Comparison of high‐fidelity simulators versus trained actors. Academic Emergency Medicine. 2008;15(11):1144-51.
• 29. Boostel R, Felix JVC, Bortolato-Major C, Pedrolo E, Vayego SA, Mantovani MF. Stress of nursing students in clinical simulation: a randomized clinical trial. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem. 2018;71(3):967-4.
• 30. Allen ML. Examining nursing students' stress in an end-of-life care simulation. Clinical Simulation In Nursing. 2018;14:21-8.
• 31. Nakayama N, Arakawa N, Ejiri H, Matsuda R, Makino T. Heart rate variability can clarify students’ level of stress during nursing simulation. Plos One. 2018;13(4):e0195280.
• 32. McIntosh CE, Thomas CM, Wilczynski S, McIntosh DE. Increasing Nursing Students’ Knowledge of Autism Spectrum Disorder by Using a Standardized Patient. Nursing Education Perspectives. 2018;39(1):32-4.
• 33. Kowitlawakul Y, Chow YL, Salam ZHA, Ignacio J. Exploring the use of standardized patients for simulation-based learning in preparing advanced practice nurses. Nurse Education Today. 2015;35(7):894-9.
• 34. Weiler DT, Saleem JJ, editors. Role Assignment in High Fidelity Patient Simulation and the Effects on Nursing Students’ Self-Efficacy Development. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting; 2017: SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
• 35. Lestander Ö, Lehto N, Engström Å. Nursing students' perceptions of learning after high fidelity simulation: effects of a three-step post-simulation reflection model. Nurse Education Today. 2016;40:219-24.
• 36. Weiler DT, Gibson AL, Saleem JJ. The effect of role assignment in high fidelity patient simulation on nursing students: An experimental research study. Nurse Education Today. 2018;63:29-34
• 37. Weiler DT, Saleem JJ, editors. Identifying an effect of simulation role assignment on critical thinking development in baccalaureate nursing students: A proof of concept. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting; 2016: SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
• 38. Alconero-Camarero AR, Sarabia-Cobo CM, González-Gómez S, Ibáñez-Rementería I, Lavín-Alconero L, Sarabia-Cobo AB. Nursing students' emotional intelligence, coping styles and learning satisfaction in clinically simulated palliative care scenarios: An observational study. Nurse Education Today. 2018;61:94-100.