First Italian validation of the “Satisfaction with simulation experience” scale (SSE) for the evaluation of the learning experience through simulation.

Main Article Content

Massimo Guasconi https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8855-8919
Beatrice Tansini
Carlotta Granata
Maurizio Beretta
Maria Bertuol
Enrico Lucenti
Laura Deiana
Giovanna Artioli
Leopoldo Sarli

Keywords

nurses;, students;, simulation;, satisfaction;, education;, first Italian validation of SSE;, instrument;, validation;

Abstract

Background and aim of the work. Training in simulation through "mannequins" is increasingly widespread among nursing students. In the Italian context, however, there are no tools that measure the degree of student satisfaction after clinical training through simulation. The aim of the study is to provide a first validation in Italian of the Satisfaction with simulation experience” (SSE) scale, a tool already validated in several languages.


Methods. After obtaining the author's consent, the SSE was subjected to forward and backward translation. The content validity was assessed by 5 training experts by calculating the Content Validity Index by Item and by Scale (I-CVI and S-CVI); the face validity was tested on 4 nursing students who had participated in a simulation experience. Subsequently, the SSE was administered to 10 nursing students with test-retest after 7 days in order to evaluate the reliability by calculating the reliability coefficient (r) and Cronbach's α.


Results. The author approved the final version of the SSE translated into Italian: I-CVI values>0.80 and S-CVI was 0.94. r is 0.88 and the α of the scale is 0.713.


Conclusions. The detected values of I-CVI and S-CVI are satisfactory, demonstrating the validity of the content of the SSE-ITA. The test-retest showed "optimal" reliability and the α was considered acceptable given the little deviation from the original (0.776). Although the results demonstrate satisfactory values, this is a first validation and other studies with larger samples are needed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Abstract 39 | PDF Downloads 15

References

1. Masoni M, Guelfi MR, Shtylla J. Metodologie didattiche per l’integrazione di pazienti virtuali nella formazione del medico. [Didactic methodologies for the integration of virtual patients in the doctor’s training]. Tutor. 2016;16(2):22–9.
2. Miller JL, Avery MD, Larson K, Woll A, VonAchen A, Mortenson A. Emergency Birth Hybrid Simulation with Standardized Patients in Midwifery Education: Implementation and Evaluation. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2015;60(3):298–303.
3. O’Donnell JM, Decker S, Howard V, Levett-Jones T, Miller CW. NLN/Jeffries Simulation Framework State of the Science Project: Simulation Learning Outcomes. Clin Simul Nurs. 2014;10(7):373–82.
4. Lucenti E. La formazione in simulazione: scelta essenziale per l’infermiere di emergenza territoriale. [Training in simulation: an essential choice for the local emergency nurse]. SIIET - Società Italiana Infermieri Emergenza Territoriale. Accessed on 28 september 2020. Available on: https://www.siiet.org/post/la-formazione-in-simulazione-scelta-essenziale-per-l-infermiere-di-emergenza-territoriale
5. Munangatire T, Naidoo N. Exploration of high-fidelity simulation: Nurse educators’ perceptions and experiences at a school of nursing in a resource-limited setting. Afr J Health Prof Educ. 2017;9(1):44–7.
6. Sponton A, Iadeluca A. La simulazione nell’infermieristica. [The simulation in nursing]. CEA; 2014.
7. SIMMED - Società Italiana di Simulazione in Medicina. Strumenti formativi. [Italian Society of Simulation in Medicine. Training tools] Accessed on 28 september 2020. Available on: http://www.simmed.it/new/index.php/metodologia-didattica/strumenti-formativi/
8. Sprawls P. Evolving models for medical physics education and training: a global perspective. Biomed Imaging Interv J. 2008;4(1):e16.
9. Garrett BM, MacPhee M, Jackson C. Implementing high-fidelity simulation in Canada: Reflections on 3years of practice. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):671–6.
10. Tamaki T, Inumaru A, Yokoi Y, Fujii M, Tomita M, Inoue Y, et al. The effectiveness of end-of-life care simulation in undergraduate nursing education: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Educ Today. 2019;76:1–7.
11. Chamberlain J. The Impact of Simulation Prebriefing on Perceptions of Overall Effectiveness, Learning, and Self-Confidence in Nursing Students. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2017;38(3):119–25.
12. Albano F. Imparare a fare, facendo: L’apprendimento per simulazione. [Learning to do by doing: Learning by simulation] Accessed on 28 september 2020. Available on: https://www.nurse24.it/infermiere/formazione/apprendimento-per-simulazione.html.
13. McRae ME, Chan A, Hulett R, Lee AJ, Coleman B. The effectiveness of and satisfaction with high-fidelity simulation to teach cardiac surgical resuscitation skills to nurses. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2017;40:64–9.
14. Sundler AJ, Pettersson A, Berglund M. Undergraduate nursing students’ experiences when examining nursing skills in clinical simulation laboratories with high-fidelity patient simulators: A phenomenological research study. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(12):1257–61.
15. Cardoza MP. Neuroscience and Simulation: An Evolving Theory of Brain-Based Education. Clin Simul Nurs. 2011;7(6):e205–8.
16. McKenna L, Bogossian F, Hall H, Brady S, Fox-Young S, Cooper S. Is simulation a substitute for real life clinical experience in midwifery? A qualitative examination of perceptions of educational leaders. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):682–6.
17. Rubbi I, Ferri P, Andreina G, Cremonini V. L’apprendimento clinico in simulazione: studio osservazionale sulla soddisfazione percepita dagli studenti di infermieristica [Learning in clinical simulation: observational study on satisfaction perceived by students of nursing]. Prof Inferm. 2016;69(2):84–94.
18. Eyikara E, Baykara ZG. The Importance of Simulation in Nursing Education. World J Educ Technol Curr Issues. 2017;9(1):2–7.
19. Sinclair B, Ferguson K. Integrating Simulated Teaching/Learning Strategies in Undergraduate Nursing Education. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2009;6(1).
20. Berragan L. Simulation: An effective pedagogical approach for nursing? Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):660–3.
21. Dow A. Clinical simulation: a new approach to midwifery education. Br J Midwifery. 2008;16(2):94–8.
22. Omer T. Nursing Students’ Perceptions of Satisfaction and Self-Confidence with Clinical Simulation Experience. J Educ Pract. 2016;7(5):131–8.
23. Hegland PA, Aarlie H, Strømme H, Jamtvedt G. Simulation-based training for nurses: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;54:6–20.
24. Pritchard SA, Blackstock FC, Nestel D, Keating JL. Simulated Patients in Physical Therapy Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Phys Ther. 2016;96(9):1342–53.
25. Lendahls L, Oscarsson MG. Midwifery students’ experiences of simulation- and skills training. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;50:12–6.
26. Levett-Jones T, McCoy M, Lapkin S, Noble D, Hoffman K, Dempsey J, et al. The development and psychometric testing of the Satisfaction with Simulation Experience Scale. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):705–10.
27. Williams BA, Dousek S. The satisfaction with simulation experience scale SSES: A validation study. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2012;2(3):74–80.
28. Kwon H-J, Yoou S-K. Validation of a Korean version of the satisfaction with simulation experience scale for paramedic students. Korean J Emerg Med Serv. 2014;18(2):7–20.
29. Yoou S-K, Kwon H-J. Study about the satisfaction with simulation practice course experience on ACLS of paramedic students. J Korea Acad-Ind Coop Soc. 2015;16(10):6647–54.
30. Area di Simulazione Clinico Organizzativa (ASCO). [Clinical Organizational Simulation Area] Accessed on 28 september 2020. Available on: http://www.ausl.pc.it/asco/brochure.pdf
31. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186–91.
32. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(2):268–74.
33. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35(6):382–5.
34. Anastasi A. Psychological testing. 6th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company; 1988.
35. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):489–97.
36. Polit F, Beck CT. Fondamenti di ricerca infermieristica. italiana a cura di: Alvisa Palese. [Fundamentals of Nursing Research]. Milano: McGraw-Hill Companies; 2014.
37. Gliem JA, Gliem RR. Calculating, Interpreting, And Reporting Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient For Likert-Type Scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education. 2003;
38. Garrino L, Arrigoni C, Grugnetti AM, Martin B, Cola S, Dimonte V. Il briefing e il debriefing nell’apprendimento protetto in simulazioni per le professioni della cura: analisi della letteratura. [Briefing and debriefing in protected learning in simulations for the nursing professions: literature analysis]. MEDIC. 2015;23(2):73–90.
39. de Oliveira SN, Prado ML do, Kempfer SS, Martini JG, Caravaca-Morera JA, Bernardi MC. Experiential learning in nursing consultation education via clinical simulation with actors: Action research. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(2):e50–4.
40. Kimhi E, Reishtein JL, Cohen M, Friger M, Hurvitz N, Avraham R. Impact of Simulation and Clinical Experience on Self-efficacy in Nursing Students: Intervention Study. Nurse Educ. 2016;41(1):E1.
41. Falbo L, Terzoni S, Destrebecq A, Bonetti L. Traduzione e validazione in italiano della Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) per la valutazione del dolore in pazienti incoscienti e sedati. [Translation and validation in Italian of the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) for pain assessment in unconscious and sedated patients]. Scenario. 2013;30(4):18.