TY - JOUR
T1 - Development of student simulated patient training and evaluation indicators in a high-fidelity nursing simulation
T2 - a Delphi consensus study†
AU - Yuan, Hao Bin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Shanxi Medical Periodical Press.
PY - 2021/3/1
Y1 - 2021/3/1
N2 - Objective: This study is aimed to develop student simulated patient (SSP) training content and evaluation indicators, and further explores their validity and reliabilities. Methods: Delphi consultations with 20 nursing experts were conducted. The weights of indicators were calculated through the analytic hierarchy process. SSP training was conducted with a high-fidelity nursing simulation. Results: The expert positive coefficients were 0.952 in the first round consultation and 1.00 in the second round consultation. The expert authority coefficient was reported as 0.87. The training included role and responsibility of simulated patient (SP), script interpretation, plot performance, and training for a rater, with a total of 17 indicators. SSP evaluation consisted of disease knowledge, role portrayal, and performance fidelity and since being a rater, it consists of 20 indicators in total. The coordination coefficients of two rounds of consultation ranged from 0.530 to 0.918. The content validity of SSP evaluation indicators was 0.95. The inter-rater reliability was reported as 0.866, and the internal consistency established using Cronbach’s α was 0.727. Conclusions: Students as SPs should have first-hand knowledge and experience within the simulated scenarios. SSP training content and evaluation indicators were determined through the Delphi consensus combined with analytic hierarchy process. The evaluation indicators were valid and reliable, and provided the objective and quantifiable measurements for SSP training in nursing.
AB - Objective: This study is aimed to develop student simulated patient (SSP) training content and evaluation indicators, and further explores their validity and reliabilities. Methods: Delphi consultations with 20 nursing experts were conducted. The weights of indicators were calculated through the analytic hierarchy process. SSP training was conducted with a high-fidelity nursing simulation. Results: The expert positive coefficients were 0.952 in the first round consultation and 1.00 in the second round consultation. The expert authority coefficient was reported as 0.87. The training included role and responsibility of simulated patient (SP), script interpretation, plot performance, and training for a rater, with a total of 17 indicators. SSP evaluation consisted of disease knowledge, role portrayal, and performance fidelity and since being a rater, it consists of 20 indicators in total. The coordination coefficients of two rounds of consultation ranged from 0.530 to 0.918. The content validity of SSP evaluation indicators was 0.95. The inter-rater reliability was reported as 0.866, and the internal consistency established using Cronbach’s α was 0.727. Conclusions: Students as SPs should have first-hand knowledge and experience within the simulated scenarios. SSP training content and evaluation indicators were determined through the Delphi consensus combined with analytic hierarchy process. The evaluation indicators were valid and reliable, and provided the objective and quantifiable measurements for SSP training in nursing.
KW - Delphi method
KW - High-fidelity simulation
KW - Nursing
KW - Student simulated patient
KW - Training
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105746592&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2478/fon-2021-0003
DO - 10.2478/fon-2021-0003
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85105746592
SN - 2544-8994
VL - 8
SP - 23
EP - 31
JO - Frontiers of Nursing
JF - Frontiers of Nursing
IS - 1
ER -