[en] BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training has proved to be an effective teaching and learning approach in healthcare. Nevertheless, any assessment of its effectiveness should also take the students' perspective into account. AIM: To validate the Satisfaction with Simulation Experience Scale (SSES) for use with midwifery students and evaluate midwifery students' satisfaction with perinatal simulation-based training. METHODS: Satisfaction with simulation was assessed using the SSES, a measurement tool translated from English to Dutch. Data was collected in four consecutive years (2016-19). A mixed methods design was used to capture both qualitative and quantitative data. Using the quantitative data, factor analysis was performed to assess the construct validity, while Cronbach's alpha was used to assess internal consistency. Qualitative data was assessed using thematic content analysis. FINDINGS: 367 SSES questionnaires were completed by 251 students. The exploratory factor analysis resulted in a three-factor model covering debriefing and reflection, clinical reasoning and clinical learning. Cronbach's alpha showed good internal consistency. Students were very satisfied with perinatal simulation-based training for all three factors: 4.30 (SD=0.47) for debriefing and reflection, 3.97 (SD=0.55) for clinical reasoning and 4.10 (SD=0.46) for clinical learning. Satisfaction scores remained high and stable over the years investigated. Thematic content analysis identified 6 categories: simulation-based training is valuable, the need for more simulation-based training, fidelity, students, negative feelings, and preparation is vital. CONCLUSION: Students were satisfied with the simulation-based training, experiencing it as providing added value to their education. Simulations gave them the opportunity to make and learn from mistakes in a safe learning environment.
Disciplines :
Nursing Science
Author, co-author :
VERMEULEN, Joris ; University of Luxembourg ; Erasmus Brussels University of Applied Sciences and Arts > Knowledge Centre Brussels Integrated Care
Buyl, Ronald; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, Biostatistics and Medical Informatics Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
D'haenens, Florence; Department Health Care, Knowledge Centre Brussels Integrated Care, Erasmus Brussels University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Laarbeeklaan 121, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Swinnen, Eva; Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation Research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium.
Stas, Lara; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, Biostatistics and Medical Informatics Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Gucciardo, Leonardo; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium, Department of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Brussels, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Fobelets, Maaike; Department Health Care, Knowledge Centre Brussels Integrated Care, Erasmus Brussels University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Laarbeeklaan 121, 1090 Brussels, Belgium, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, Biostatistics and Medical Informatics Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
External co-authors :
yes
Language :
English
Title :
Midwifery students' satisfaction with perinatal simulation-based training.
Al-Ghareeb, A.Z., Cooper, S.J., Review: barriers and enablers to the use of high-fidelity patient simulation manikins in nurse education: an integrative review. Nurse Educ. Today 36 (2016), 281–286.
Andersen, P., Baron, S., Bassett, J., Govind, N., Hayes, C., Lapkin, S., et al. Snapshots of simulation: innovative strategies used by international educators to enhance simulation learning experiences for health care students. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 16 (2018), 8–14.
Alconero-Camarero, A.R., Gualdrón-Romero, A., Sarabia-Cobo, C.M., Martinez-Arce, A., Clinical simulation as a learning tool in undergraduate nursing: validation of a questionnaire. Nurse Educ. Today 39 (2016), 128–134.
Levett-Jones, T., McCoy, M., Lapkin, S., Noble, D., Hoffman, K., Dempsey, J., et al. The development and psychometric testing of the satisfaction with simulation experience scale. Nurse Educ. Today 31 (2011), 705–710.
Cooper, S., Cant, R., Porter, J., Bogossian, F., McKenna, L., Brady, S., et al. Review article: simulation based learning in midwifery education: a systematic review. Women Birth 25 (2012), 64–78.
Amod, Hb, Brysiewicz, P., Promoting experiential learning through the use of high-fidelity human patient simulators in midwifery: a qualitative study. Curationis, 42(1), 2019, 7.
Foronda, C., Liu, S., Bauman, E.B., Featured article: evaluation of simulation in undergraduate nurse education: an integrative review. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 9 (2013), e409–e416.
Cant, R.P., Cooper, S.J., The value of simulation-based learning in pre-licensure nurse education: a state-of-the-art review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ. Pract. 27 (2017), 45–62.
Williams, B., Dousek, S., The satisfaction with simulation experience scale (SSES): a validation study. J. Nurs. Educ. Pract., 2(3), 2012, 74.
Labrague, L.J., McEnroe-Petitte, D.M., Bowling, A.M., Nwafor, C.E., Tsaras, K., High-fidelity simulation and nursing students’ anxiety and self-confidence: a systematic review. Nurs. Forum, 2019.
Carolan-Olah, M., Kruger, G., Brown, V., Lawton, F., Mazzarino, M., Vasilevski, V., Communicating out loud: midwifery students’ experiences of a simulation exercise for neonatal resuscitation. Nurse Educ. Pract. 29 (2018), 8–14.
Agha, S., Alhamrani, A.Y., Khan, M.A., Satisfaction of medical students with simulation based learning. Saudi Med. J. 36:6 (2015), 731–736.
Zapko, K.A., Ferranto, M.L.G., Blasiman, R., Shelestak, D., Evaluating best educational practices, student satisfaction, and self-confidence in simulation: a descriptive study. Nurse Educ. Today 60 (2018), 28–34.
Yockey, J., Henry, M., Simulation anxiety across the curriculum. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 29 (2019), 29–37.
Vermeulen, J., Beeckman, K., Turcksin, R., Van Winkel, L., Gucciardo, L., Laubach, M., et al. The experiences of last-year student midwives with high-fidelity perinatal simulation training: a qualitative descriptive study. Women Birth 30:3 (2017), 253–261.
Tosterud, R., Petzäll, K., Hedelin, B., Hall-Lord, M.L., Psychometric testing of the Norwegian version of the questionnaire, student satisfaction and self-Confidence in learning, used in simulation. Nurse Educ. Pract. 14:6 (2014), 704–708.
Mariani, B., Doolen, J., Nursing simulation research: what are the perceived gaps?. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 12:1 (2016), 30–36.
Baptista, R.C.N., Martins, J.C.A., Pereira, M.F.C.R., Mazzo, A., Students’ satisfaction with simulated clinical experiences: validation of an assessment scale. Rev. Lat. Enfermagem 22:5 (2014), 709–715.
Díaz, D.A., Louise, R., Shelton, D., Barta, W.D., Psychometric validation of satisfaction with simulated clinical learning experience evaluation–corrections (SSCLEE-C). Int. J. Nurs. Sci. 3:1 (2016), 58–62.
European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Directive 2013/55/EU of the European parliament and of the council of 20th November 2013 (English). Official J. Eur. Union, 2013 28.12.2013, L354/132-L354/169.
Vermeulen, J., Luyben, A., Buyl, R., Debonnet, S., Castiaux, G., Niset, A., et al. The state of professionalisation of midwifery in Belgium: a discussion paper. Women Birth, 2020.
Vermeulen, J., Vandelannoote, I., Fobelets, M., De Clercq, G., Beeckman, K., An integrative educational model aiming to improve student midwives’ readiness for practice in Brussels, Belgium. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol., 234, 2019, e40.
Nyström, A., Pålsson, Y., Hofsten, A., Häggström, E., Nursing students’ experiences of being video-recorded during examination in a fictive emergency care situation. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 20:5 (2014), 540–548.
Steinwachs, B., How to facilitate a debriefing. Simul. Gaming 23:2 (1992), 186–195.
Gourounti, K., Anagnostopoulos, F., Alexias, G., Vaslamatzis, G., Appraisal of life events scale in a sample of Greek infertile women undergoing fertility treatment: a confirmatory factor analysis. Midwifery 28:4 (2012), 385–390.
Dillman, D.A., Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2000, Wiley, New York.
Perry, J.L., Nicholls, A.R., Clough, P.J., Crust, L., Assessing model fit: caveats and recommendations for confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling. Meas. Phys. Educ. Exerc. Sci. 19:1 (2015), 12–21.
R Development Core Team, R Development Core Team, R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2004, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
Rosseel, Y., Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). J. Stat. Softw. 48:2 (2012), 1–36.
Bentler, P.M., Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol. Bull. 107:2 (1990), 238–246.
Cook, K.F., Kallen, M.A., Amtmann, D., Having a fit: impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT's unidimensionality assumption. Qual. Life Res. 18:4 (2009), 447–460.
Kenny, D.A., Measuring Model Fit. 2015 http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm.
Kline, R.B., Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 3rd ed., 2011, Guilford Press, New York, NY, US.
Epskamp, S., semPlot: unified visualizations of structural equation models. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 22:3 (2015), 474–483.
Raiche G, Magis D. nFactors: an R package for parallel analysis and non graphical solutions to the Cattell scree test. R package version 2010; 2(3).
Polit, D.F., Beck, C.T., Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. 2008, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Polit, D., Hungler, B., Nursing Research Principles and Methods. 1999, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia.
Green, J., Thorogood, N., Qualitative Methods for Health Research. 2nd ed., 2009, Sage Publications, London London: Sage; 2009.
Coffey, F., Learning by simulation - is it a useful tool for midwifery education?. N. Z. Coll. Midwives J. 51 (2015), 30–36.
Palominos, E., Levett-Jones, T., Power, T., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Healthcare students’ perceptions and experiences of making errors in simulation: an integrative review. Nurse Educ. Today 77 (2019), 32–39.
Basak, T., Unver, V., Moss, J., Watts, P., Gaioso, V., Beginning and advanced students’ perceptions of the use of low-and high-fidelity mannequins in nursing simulation. Nurse Educ. Today 36 (2016), 37–43.
Halabi Najjar, R., Lyman, B., Miehl, N., Nursing students’ experiences with high-fidelity simulation. Int. J. Nurs. Educ. Scholarsh. 12:1 (2015), 1–9.
Deegan, M., Terry, L., Student midwives’ perceptions of real-time simulation: a qualitative phenomenological study. Br. J. Midwifery 21:8 (2013), 590–598.
Vermeulen, J., Beeckman, K., De Clercq, G., Vandelannoote, I., Gucciardo, L., Laubach, M., et al. Inter-professional Perinatal Simulation training: a valuable educational model to improve competencies amongst student midwives in Brussels, Belgium. Midwifery 33 (2016), 49–51.
