Comparison of Effect of Simulation-based Neonatal Resuscitation Education and Traditional Education on Knowledge of Nursing Students

Authors

1 Neonatal and Maternal Research Center, Imam Reza Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran

Abstract

Background: Simulation is used for teaching neonatal resuscitation; however, studies assessing the impact of
simulation-based neonatal resuscitation education (SBE) have produced variable results. In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of SBE on nursing students’ knowledge.
Methods: This experimental study was conducted at Faculty of Nursing of Neishabour University of Medical Sciences on 80 nurses selected through convenience sampling method. The data was collected using a standardized questionnaire for neonatal resuscitation designed based on the Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP; 7th Ed, 2016). To analyze the data, we performed independent samples t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson correlation coefficient, and paired t-test in SPSS, version 16.
Results: There were no significant differences in the level of knowledge of neonatal resuscitation between the two groups at pre-test (P=0.452). However, comparison of the two groups at post-test reflected that the mean score of the students in the SBE group was significantly higher than the traditional group (P<0.001).
Conclusion: SBE was significantly more effective than traditional neonatal resuscitation education.

Keywords


1. Waage J, Banerji R, Campbell O, Chirwa E, Collender G, Dieltiens V, et al. The Millennium Development Goals: a cross-sectoral analysis and principles for goal setting after 2015 Lancet and London International Development Centre Commission. Lancet. 2010; 376(9745):991-1023.

2. Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D, Perin J, Rudan I, Lawn JE, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality in 2000-13, with projections to inform post-2015 priorities: an updated systematic analysis. Lancet. 2015; 385(9966):430-40.

3. Lawn JE, Cousens S, Zupan J; Lancet Neonatal Survival Steering Team. 4 million neonatal deaths: when? where? why? Lancet. 2005; 365(9462):891-900.

4. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) consensus on science with treatment recommendations for pediatric and neonatal patients: neonatal resuscitation. Pediatrics. 2006; 117(5):e978-88.

5. Chance GW, Hanvey L. Neonatal resuscitation in Canadian hospitals. CMAJ. 1987; 136(6):601-6.

6. Knippenberg R, Lawn JE, Darmstadt GL, Begkoyian G, Fogstad H, Walelign N, et al. Systematic scaling up of neonatal care in countries. Lancet. 2005; 365(9464):1087-98.

7. Kambarami RA, Chirenje MZ, Rusakaniko S. Perinatal practices in two rural districts of Zimbabwe: a community perspective. Cent Afr J Med. 2000; 46(4):96-100.

8. Rakshasbhuvankar AA, Patole SK. Benefits of simulation based training for neonatal resuscitation education: a systematic review. Resuscitation. 2014; 85(10):1320–3.

9. Cavaleiro A, Guimaraes H, Calheiros F. Training neonatal skills with simulators? Acta Paediatr. 2009; 98(4):636–9.

10. Lee MO, Brown LL, Bender J, Machan JT, Overly FL. A medical simulation-based educational intervention for emergency medicine residents in neonatal resuscitation. Acad Emerg Med. 2012; 19(5):577–85.

11. Weiner GM, Menghini K, Zaichkin J, Caid AE, Jacoby CJ, Simon WM. Self-directed versus traditional classroom training for neonatal resuscitation. Pediatrics. 2011; 127(4):713–9.

12. Curran V, Aziz K, O'Young S, Bessell C. Evaluation of the effect of a computerized training simulator (ANAKIN) on retention of neonatal resuscitation skills. Teach Learn Med. 2004; 16(2):157–64.

13. Draycott T, Sibanda T, Owen L, Akande V, Winter C, Reading S. Does training in obstetric emergencies improve neonatal outcome? BJOG. 2006; 113(2):177–82.