Evaluating the impact of high- and low-fidelity instruction in the development of auscultation skills

Medical Education

Volumn 49, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 276-285

  Chen, Ruth ^a   Grierson, Lawrence E ^a   Norman, Geoffrey R ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; BREATHING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDUCATIONAL MODEL; HEART AUSCULTATION; HEART SOUND; HUMAN; LEARNING; LUNG; NURSING EDUCATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TEACHING;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; EDUCATION, NURSING, BACCALAUREATE; HEART AUSCULTATION; HEART SOUNDS; HUMANS; LEARNING; LUNG; MANIKINS; MODELS, EDUCATIONAL; PATIENT SIMULATION; RESPIRATION;

EID: 84922980438     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/medu.12653     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Holmboe ES. Faculty and the observation of trainees' clinical skills: problems and opportunities. Acad Med 2004;79 (1):16.
2. Mangione S. Cardiac auscultatory skills of physicians-in-training: a comparison of three English-speaking countries. Am J Med 2001;110 (3):210.
3. Mangione S, Nieman LZ. Cardiac auscultatory skills of internal medicine and family practice trainees. JAMA 1997;278 (9):717-22.
4. Mangione S, Nieman LZ. Pulmonary auscultatory skills during training in internal medicine and family practice. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;159 (4):1119-24.
5. Jeffries PR. A frame work for designing, implementing, and evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nurs Educ Perspect 2005;26 (2):96-103.
6. Nehring WM. US boards of nursing and the use of high-fidelity patient simulators in nursing education. J Prof Nurs 2008;24 (2):109-17.
7. Bambini D, Washburn J, Perkins R. Outcomes of clinical simulation for novice nursing students: communication, confidence, clinical judgement. Nurs Educ Perspect 2009;30 (2):79-82.
8. Blum CA, Borglund S, Parcells D. High-fidelity nursing simulation: impact on student self-confidence and clinical competence. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh 2010;7: Article 18.
9. Fountain RA, Alfred D. Student satisfaction with high-fidelity simulation: does it correlate with learning styles? Nurs Educ Perspect 2009;30 (2):96-8.
10. Garrett B, MacPhee M, Jackson C. High-fidelity patient simulation: considerations for effective learning. Nurs Educ Perspect 2010;31 (5):309-13.
11. Leigh GT. High-fidelity patient simulation and nursing students' self-efficacy: a review of the literature. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh 2008;5: Article 37.
12. Nehring WM, Lashley FR. Nursing simulation: a review of the past 40 years. Simul Gaming 2009;40 (4):528-52.
13. Reilly A, Spratt C. The perceptions of undergraduate student nurses of high-fidelity simulation-based learning: a case report from the University of Tasmania. Nurse Educ Today 2007;27 (6):542.
14. Schoening AM, Sittner BJ, Todd MJ. Simulated clinical experience: nursing students' perceptions and the educators' role. Nurse Educ 2006;31 (6):253-8.
15. Weaver A. High-fidelity patient simulation in nursing education: an integrative review. Nurs Educ Perspect 2011;32 (1):37-40.
16. Wotton K, Davis J, Button D, Kelton M. Third-year undergraduate nursing students' perceptions of high-fidelity simulation. J Nurs Educ 2010;49 (11):632.
17. Alinier G, Hunt B, Gordon R, Harwood C. Effectiveness of intermediate-fidelity simulation training technology in undergraduate nursing education. J Adv Nurs 2006;54 (3):359-69.
18. Alinier G, Hunt WB, Gordon R. Determining the value of simulation in nurse education: study design and initial results. Nurse Educ Pract 2004;4 (3):200-7.
19. Cook DA, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, Erwin PJ, Hatala R. Comparative effectiveness of technology-enhanced simulation versus other instructional methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Simul Healthc 2012;7 (5):308-20.
20. Kaakinen J, Arwood E. Systematic review of nursing simulation literature for use of learning theory. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh 2009;6: Article 16.
21. Paige JB, Daley BJ. Situated cognition: a learning framework to support and guide high-fidelity simulation. Clin Simul Nurs 2009;5 (3):e97-103.
22. Solnick A, Weiss S. High fidelity simulation in nursing education: a review of the literature. Clin Simul Nurs 2007;3 (1):e41-5.
23. Wilson M, Shepherd I, Kelly C, Pitzner J. Assessment of a low-fidelity human patient simulator for the acquisition of nursing skills. Nurse Educ Today 2005;25 (1):56-67.
24. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, Erwin PJ, Hamstra SJ. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education. JAMA 2011;306 (9):978-88.
25. Durning SJ, Dong T, Artino AR Jr, LaRochelle J, Pangaro LN, van der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L. Instructional authenticity and clinical reasoning in undergraduate medical education: a 2-year, prospective, randomised trial. Mil Med 2012;177 (9 Suppl):38-43.
26. Durning SJ, LaRochelle J, Pangaro L, Artino AR Jr, Boulet J, van der Vleuten C, Hemmer P, Denton D, Schuwirth L. Does the authenticity of preclinical teaching format affect subsequent clinical clerkship outcomes? A prospective randomised crossover trial. Teach Learn Med 2012;24 (2):177-82.
27. La Rochelle JS, Durning SJ, Pangaro LN, Artino AR, van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth L. Authenticity of instruction and student performance: a prospective randomised trial. Med Educ 2011;45 (8):807-17.
28. LaRochelle JS, Durning SJ, Pangaro LN, Artino AR, van der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L. Impact of increased authenticity in instructional format on preclerkship students' performance: a two-year, prospective, randomised study. Acad Med 2012;87 (10):1341-7.
29. van Merriënboer JJG, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Med Educ 2010;44 (1):85-93.
30. Leahy W, Sweller J. Cognitive load and the imagination effect. Appl Cogn Psychol 2004;18 (7):857-75.
31. Paas F, Renkl A, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educ Psychol 2003;38 (1):1-4.
32. Mayer RE. Applying the science of learning to medical education. Med Educ 2010;44 (6):543-9.
33. Godden DR, Baddeley AD. Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: on land and underwater. Br J Psychol 1975;66 (3):325-31.
34. Koens F, ten Cate OTJ, Custers EJ. Context-dependent memory in a meaningful environment for medical education: in the classroom and at the bedside. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2003;8 (2):155-65.
35. Norman G, Dore K, Grierson L. The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Med Educ 2012;46 (7):636-47.
36. Cook DA, Triola MM. Virtual patients: a critical literature review and proposed next steps. Med Educ 2009;43 (4):303-11.
37. Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc 2007;2 (3):183-93.
38. Grierson LE. Information processing, specificity of practice, and the transfer of learning: considerations for reconsidering fidelity. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2014;19 (2):281-9.
39. Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low- to high-fidelity simulation - a continuum of medical education? Med Educ 2003;37 (Suppl 1):22-8.
40. Brydges R, Carnahan H, Rose D, Rose L, Dubrowski A. Coordinating progressive levels of simulation fidelity to maximise educational benefit. Acad Med 2010;85 (5):806-12.
41. Rouet J-F, Levonen J, Biardeau A. Multimedia Learning: Cognitive and Instructional Issues. London: Pergamon 2001;1.