Cargando…
GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review
BACKGROUND: In-situ simulation is increasingly employed in healthcare settings to support learning and improve patient, staff and organisational outcomes. It can help participants to problem solve within real, dynamic and familiar clinical settings, develop effective multidisciplinary team working a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35818052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03401-y |
_version_ | 1784744916313702400 |
---|---|
author | Evans, Kerry Woodruff, Jenny Cowley, Alison Bramley, Louise Miles, Giulia Ross, Alastair Cooper, Joanne Baxendale, Bryn |
author_facet | Evans, Kerry Woodruff, Jenny Cowley, Alison Bramley, Louise Miles, Giulia Ross, Alastair Cooper, Joanne Baxendale, Bryn |
author_sort | Evans, Kerry |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In-situ simulation is increasingly employed in healthcare settings to support learning and improve patient, staff and organisational outcomes. It can help participants to problem solve within real, dynamic and familiar clinical settings, develop effective multidisciplinary team working and facilitates learning into practice. There is nevertheless a reported lack of a standardised and cohesive approach across healthcare organisations. The aim of this systematic mapping review was to explore and map the current evidence base for in-situ interventions, identify gaps in the literature and inform future research and evaluation questions. METHODS: A systematic mapping review of published in-situ simulation literature was conducted. Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL, MIDIRS and ProQuest databases to identify all relevant literature from inception to October 2020. Relevant papers were retrieved, reviewed and extracted data were organised into broad themes. RESULTS: Sixty-nine papers were included in the mapping review. In-situ simulation is used 1) as an assessment tool; 2) to assess and promote system readiness and safety cultures; 3) to improve clinical skills and patient outcomes; 4) to improve non-technical skills (NTS), knowledge and confidence. Most studies included were observational and assessed individual, team or departmental performance against clinical standards. There was considerable variation in assessment methods, length of study and the frequency of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping highlights various in-situ simulation approaches designed to address a range of objectives in healthcare settings; most studies report in-situ simulation to be feasible and beneficial in addressing various learning and improvement objectives. There is a lack of consensus for implementing and evaluating in-situ simulation and further studies are required to identify potential benefits and impacts on patient outcomes. In-situ simulation studies need to include detailed demographic and contextual data to consider transferability across care settings and teams and to assess possible confounding factors. Valid and reliable data collection tools should be developed to capture the complexity of team and individual performance in real settings. Research should focus on identifying the optimal frequency and length of in-situ simulations to improve outcomes and maximize participant experience. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9272657 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92726572022-07-11 GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review Evans, Kerry Woodruff, Jenny Cowley, Alison Bramley, Louise Miles, Giulia Ross, Alastair Cooper, Joanne Baxendale, Bryn BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: In-situ simulation is increasingly employed in healthcare settings to support learning and improve patient, staff and organisational outcomes. It can help participants to problem solve within real, dynamic and familiar clinical settings, develop effective multidisciplinary team working and facilitates learning into practice. There is nevertheless a reported lack of a standardised and cohesive approach across healthcare organisations. The aim of this systematic mapping review was to explore and map the current evidence base for in-situ interventions, identify gaps in the literature and inform future research and evaluation questions. METHODS: A systematic mapping review of published in-situ simulation literature was conducted. Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL, MIDIRS and ProQuest databases to identify all relevant literature from inception to October 2020. Relevant papers were retrieved, reviewed and extracted data were organised into broad themes. RESULTS: Sixty-nine papers were included in the mapping review. In-situ simulation is used 1) as an assessment tool; 2) to assess and promote system readiness and safety cultures; 3) to improve clinical skills and patient outcomes; 4) to improve non-technical skills (NTS), knowledge and confidence. Most studies included were observational and assessed individual, team or departmental performance against clinical standards. There was considerable variation in assessment methods, length of study and the frequency of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping highlights various in-situ simulation approaches designed to address a range of objectives in healthcare settings; most studies report in-situ simulation to be feasible and beneficial in addressing various learning and improvement objectives. There is a lack of consensus for implementing and evaluating in-situ simulation and further studies are required to identify potential benefits and impacts on patient outcomes. In-situ simulation studies need to include detailed demographic and contextual data to consider transferability across care settings and teams and to assess possible confounding factors. Valid and reliable data collection tools should be developed to capture the complexity of team and individual performance in real settings. Research should focus on identifying the optimal frequency and length of in-situ simulations to improve outcomes and maximize participant experience. BioMed Central 2022-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9272657/ /pubmed/35818052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03401-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Evans, Kerry Woodruff, Jenny Cowley, Alison Bramley, Louise Miles, Giulia Ross, Alastair Cooper, Joanne Baxendale, Bryn GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title | GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title_full | GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title_fullStr | GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title_full_unstemmed | GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title_short | GENESISS 2—Generating Standards for In-Situ Simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
title_sort | genesiss 2—generating standards for in-situ simulation project: a systematic mapping review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35818052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03401-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT evanskerry genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT woodruffjenny genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT cowleyalison genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT bramleylouise genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT milesgiulia genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT rossalastair genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT cooperjoanne genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview AT baxendalebryn genesiss2generatingstandardsforinsitusimulationprojectasystematicmappingreview |