IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v55y2024i2p159-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Virtual Patient Simulations in Nursing Education: A Descriptive Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Gul Sahin Karaduman
  • Tulay Basak

Abstract

Background Virtual patients commonly train students in clinical competence in nursing education. This review aimed to evaluate the sample characteristics and sampling method, technological design of the virtual patients, duration of simulation methods, comparison methods used in control groups, outcomes of simulation interventions, and quality of the included randomized controlled studies. Methods Five databases were searched using English-language keywords between 1995 and 2019. The Turkish Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies was used to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials. Of the 4235 studies identified, 10 randomized controlled trials reporting virtual patients in nursing education were reviewed. Results The total number of participants in the review was 787. The virtual patient methods used in all studies differed. The duration was different in all the studies. Standardized patients, traditional education, facilitated mannequin-based simulation, written descriptions of the skills, low-, medium-, and high-fidelity simulation, and virtual simulation without training methods were used in the control groups for the comparison. Six studies indicated that virtual patients increased students’ knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, self-confidence, nursing competencies, and satisfaction levels in clinical practice, while four studies found no significant difference between the groups. The quality was poor in four of 10 studies, moderate in two of 10 studies, and strong in four of 10 studies. Conclusions This study demonstrated that the virtual patient methods used in studies varied in terms of technological design. The duration of simulation in the studies varied from less than 30 minutes to more than two months. The virtual patients could improve knowledge, skill acquisition, self-efficacy, self-confidence, and nursing competency compared with low-fidelity simulation, didactic education, no-intervention, or no-education studies. The quality results of the studies show that most of them had weak or strong research designs.

Suggested Citation

  • Gul Sahin Karaduman & Tulay Basak, 2024. "Virtual Patient Simulations in Nursing Education: A Descriptive Systematic Review," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 55(2), pages 159-179, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:55:y:2024:i:2:p:159-179
    DOI: 10.1177/10468781231224836
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10468781231224836
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10468781231224836?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gonchar V., 2016. "Forecasting as a method of metals marketing research," Економічний вісник Донбасу Экономический вестник Донбасса, CyberLeninka;Институт экономики промышленности НАН Украины, issue 4 (46), pages 104-108.
    2. Christoph Schmidt, 2016. "Research Methodology," Progress in IS, in: Agile Software Development Teams, chapter 0, pages 65-86, Springer.
    3. Catherine E Houghton & Dympna Casey & David Shaw & Kathy Murphy, 2013. "Students’ experiences of implementing clinical skills in the real world of practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(13-14), pages 1961-1969, July.
    4. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    5. Naleya Everson & Tracy Levett‐Jones & Samuel Lapkin & Victoria Pitt & Pamela van der Riet & Rachel Rossiter & Donovan Jones & Conor Gilligan & Helen Courtney‐Pratt, 2015. "Measuring the impact of a 3D simulation experience on nursing students' cultural empathy using a modified version of the Kiersma‐Chen Empathy Scale," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(19-20), pages 2849-2858, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brownstone, David & McBride, Michael & Kong, Si-Yuan & Mahmassani, Amine, 2017. "Experimental Studies for Traffic Incident Management," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6kx670mv, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    2. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    3. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    4. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    5. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    7. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    8. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    9. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    10. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    12. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    14. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    15. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    16. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    17. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    19. Subramaniam, Mega & Pang, Natalie & Morehouse, Shandra & Asgarali-Hoffman, S. Nisa, 2020. "Examining vulnerability in youth digital information practices scholarship: What are we missing or exhausting?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    20. Neal R. Haddaway & Matthew J. Page & Chris C. Pritchard & Luke A. McGuinness, 2022. "PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020‐compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:55:y:2024:i:2:p:159-179. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.