Efficacy of high-fidelity simulation in advanced life support training: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Simulation is an increasingly used novel method for the education of medical professionals. This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy of high-fidelity (HF) simulation compared with low-fidelity (LF) simulation or no simulation in advanced life support (ALS) training. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Chinese Biomedicine Database, Embase, CENTRAL, ISI, and China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of HF simulation in ALS training. Quality assessment was based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 5.0.1. The primary outcome was the improvement of knowledge and skill performance. The secondary outcomes included the participants’ confidence and satisfaction at the course conclusion, skill performance at one year, skill performance in actual resuscitation, and patient outcomes. Data were synthesized using the RevMan 5.4 software. RESULTS: Altogether, 25 RCTs with a total of 1,987 trainees were included in the meta-analysis. In the intervention group, 998 participants used HF manikins, whereas 989 participants received LF simulation-based or traditional training (classical training without simulation). Pooled data from the RCTs demonstrated a benefit in improvement of knowledge [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18–0.59, P = 0.0003, I(2) = 70%] and skill performance (SMD = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.21–1.04, P = 0.003, I(2) = 92%) for HF simulation when compared with LF simulation and traditional training. The subgroup analysis revealed a greater benefit in knowledge with HF simulation compared with traditional training at the course conclusion (SMD = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.20–0.83, P = 0.003, I(2) = 61%). Studies measuring knowledge at three months, skill performance at one year, teamwork behaviors, participants’ satisfaction and confidence demonstrated no significant benefit for HF simulation. CONCLUSIONS: Learners using HF simulation more significantly benefited from the ALS training in terms of knowledge and skill performance at the course conclusion. However, further research is necessary to enhance long-term retention of knowledge and skill in actual resuscitation and patient’s outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04654-x.