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

References

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.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics