Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35915450›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2022

Effects of a standardized patient-based simulation in anaphylactic shock management for new graduate nurses.

Qi Ren, Fang Chen, Huijuan Zhang, Juanhua Tu, Xiaowei Xu, Caixia Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Outcomes of an Interprofessional Simulation Program for New Graduate Nurses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qi RenIntensive care unit, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Fang ChenNursing department, Zhejiang Hospital, No. 1229 Gudun Road, Zhejiang, Hangzhou, China. 2589087027@qq.com.
Huijuan ZhangIntensive care unit, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Juanhua TuCardiovascular ward, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Xiaowei XuGynecology ward, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Caixia LiuNursing department, Zhejiang Hospital, No. 1229 Gudun Road, Zhejiang, Hangzhou, China.
Zhejiang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients may be endangered if new graduate nurses cannot recognize and manage anaphylactic shock. Consequently, enhancing the new graduate nurses' understanding of their roles and responsibilities during the rescue of a patient with anaphylactic shock is important. However, due to its inherent limitations, traditional classroom-based teaching makes it difficult to explore the potential of the students. Although popular simulation teaching has several notable advantages, it has not been proven to be effective in training inexperienced nurses on anaphylactic shock. We investigated the effect of a standardized patient-based simulation on the behaviors of new graduate nurses' during anaphylactic shock rescue to identify an effective and safe method for contemporary nursing education.

methodsExcept for the ill or pregnant, all the new graduate nurses were included in the study as students to undergo a standardized patient-based simulation conducted in the clinical skills center of a general hospital. The simulation training was designed to teach students to recognize the signs and symptoms of anaphylactic shock, place the patient in the correct position, stop the ongoing intravenous infusion of the antibiotic which triggers the anaphylactic shock, restart an intravenous infusion on a new infusion apparatus, give 100% oxygen via a nasal cannula or mask, preserve airway patency, call the rapid response team, and correctly administer the medications prescribed by the clinicians. Before and after the training, the instructors evaluated each student's skills and behaviors using a clinical competency evaluation list. After the training, all students completed the Chinese version of the Simulation Design Scale (SDS) to demonstrate their satisfaction with the program and then participated in semi-structured interviews with their instructors.

resultsAll 104 graduate nurses had a significant improvement on the 6 competencies of the clinical competency evaluation list after the simulation training (P < 0.001). The SDS scores revealed that the students were highly satisfied with all the aspects of the simulation training (the 20 satisfaction rates were all above 90.00%). During the semi-structured interviews, most of the new graduate nurses reported that simulation training in the management of anaphylactic shock was critical and would guide them in clinical practice.

conclusionSimulation training in anaphylactic shock is a potentially viable and effective method for teaching new graduate nurses to manage clinical incidents.

Indexed as

Anaphylactic shockNew graduate nursesSimulation trainingStandardized patient-based simulation

Identifiers

PMID35915450
PMCPMC9341083
OpenAlexW4289225992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.