Contributing to Evidence-Based Regulatory Decisions: A Comparison of Traditional Clinical Experience, Mannequin-Based Simulation, and Screen-Based Virtual Simulation

Abstract

<h3>Background</h3> Boards of nursing need empirical evidence to guide the regulation of simulation in nursing education and to make decisions about how simulation should count toward required clinical hours. <h3>Purpose</h3> The purposes of this study were to (a) compare cognitive learning and patient care performance outcomes between prelicensure nursing students who participated in 4 hours of traditional clinical experience, 2 hours of mannequin-based simulation, or 2 hours of screen-based virtual simulation and (b) examine students' self-perceptions about the efficacy of each experiential learning activity. <h3>Methods</h3> Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: 4 hours of traditional clinical experience, 2 hours of mannequin-based simulation, or 2 hours of screen-based virtual simulation. After completing their first experiential learning activity and posttest assessments, participants completed the two experiential learning activities they were not originally assigned as well as a survey regarding their self-perceptions about the effectiveness of each activity. Learning and patient care performance scores were compared between groups. <h3>Results</h3> There was no significant difference in cognitive learning outcomes between groups. On the measure of patient care performance, students who were randomized to the mannequin-based simulation group performed as well as or significantly better than students who were randomized to the other two groups. Overall, students reported that screen-based virtual simulation was the least effective of the three experiential learning activities in meeting their learning needs. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Additional research is needed to make the most effective and efficient use of our resources for experiential learning in nursing education.