Comparing the Learning Effectiveness of Healthcare Simulation in the Observer Versus Active Role: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simul Healthc. 2019 Oct;14(5):318-332. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000377.

Abstract

The benefits of observation in simulation-based education in healthcare are increasingly recognized. However, how it compares with active participation remains unclear. We aimed to compare effectiveness of observation versus active participation through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Effectiveness was defined using Kirkpatrick's 4-level model, namely, participants' reactions, learning outcomes, behavior changes, and patient outcomes. The peer-reviewed search strategy included 8 major databases and gray literature. Only randomized controlled trials were included. A total of 13 trials were included (426 active participants and 374 observers). There was no significant difference in reactions (Kirkpatrick level 1) to training between groups, but active participants learned (Kirkpatrick level 2) significantly better than observers (standardized mean difference = -0.2, 95% confidence interval = -0.37 to -0.02, P = 0.03). Only one study reported behavior change (Kirkpatrick level 3) and found no significant difference. No studies reported effects on patient outcomes (Kirkpatrick level 4). Further research is needed to understand how to effectively integrate and leverage the benefits of observation in simulation-based education in healthcare.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Behavior
  • Clinical Competence
  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Female
  • Health Personnel / education*
  • Humans
  • Learning
  • Male
  • Observation
  • Problem-Based Learning / methods*
  • Simulation Training / methods*