Conectar
The aim of this discussion paper is to explore whether recontextualisation theory deepens our understanding of learning across multiple sites when introducing simulation-based education (SBE) into nurse education.
The requirement for students to learn in clinical placements remains an aspiration as well as a regulatory requirement internationally. Yet, the increasing complexity of healthcare and the numbers of vacancies in the healthcare workforce globally have led to poor learning environments. In the context of faster internet speeds, rapid development in virtual technologies, affordability of hardware, and the move to online educational provision after the COVID-19 pandemic, SBE has emerged as a key teaching method in health professional preparation programmes globally.
Critical discussion paper.
This discussion paper is based on current literature on SBE and recontextualisation theory.
Evaluations of SBE often show positive outcomes for learning in nurse education. Weaknesses and gaps in the evidence on SBE, such as the scarcity of control groups or longitudinal studies, have been identified. Using recontextualization theory, we argue that SBE may also increase the theory-practice split for students across multiple sites of learning.
The introduction of SBE offers supplementary positive learning opportunities to those in clinical practice while at the same time creating multiple sites of learning which are not always aligned. More needs to be done to teach from a curriculum which relies on students being motivated and able to learn across multiple sites of learning.
To support student nurses in UG professional preparation programmes which rely on SBE as well as clinical practice and universities, shared values between nurse educators and clinical nurses need to be enacted collaboratively. This could be achieved by reframing how students and nurses learn and rework knowledge across sites of learning.
Competency assessment tools are well-recognised as a method to achieve a standardised level of practice for a group of healthcare professionals with similar characteristics. The aim of this study is to develop and pilot a new competency assessment tool to support therapists caring for patients with blunt chest trauma from prehospital care through to long-term follow-up following hospital discharge.
A mixed-methods study will be undertaken, with three distinct phases: (1) an integrative narrative review to examine the literature regarding therapist competencies; (2) focus groups with patients, therapists and key stakeholders to explore opinions regarding important aspects of care (phases I and II will inform the content of the tool), followed by final tool development by an international expert panel; and (3) a multicentre pilot study using questionnaires and elicitation interviews, in which final tool acceptability to therapists will be tested. The total sample size will be between 40 and 50 participants for the focus groups. For the final tool development work, a panel of 10 international experts will be identified, with a subgroup of 3–5 experts who will be recruited to confirm content validity. We will pilot the tool at five health boards in Wales, aiming for 10 therapists from each. Elicitation interviews will be undertaken with a smaller sample size of between 15 and 20 therapists. A mixed qualitative and quantitative data analysis approach will be used.
Proportionate ethics approval has been granted (South Yorkshire Research Ethics Committee, reference number: 24/YH/0231). We will publish the work in an open-access peer-reviewed journal to ensure equitable access and present at relevant conferences. Webinars will be used to achieve a wide audience. The results will be shared with the research participants via an infographic which will be designed and developed with the public research partners.
Integrative review is registered at the Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CEXNR
The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of delivering personalised isometric exercise (IE) for people with stage 1 hypertension. Is it feasible to deliver an isometric wall squat intervention in the National Health Service and what sample size is required to conduct an appropriately powered effectiveness randomised controlled trial (RCT)?
Randomised controlled open-label multicentre feasibility study of IE compared with standard care in unmedicated people with stage 1 hypertension.
Initially, the study aimed to recruit through primary care, but this process coincided with the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we shifted focus to direct-to-public advertising and delivery in secondary care.
People with unmedicated stage 1 hypertension aged over 18 able to perform IE were included. Patients were excluded if average home systolic blood pressure (sBP)
Intervention participants were randomised (1:1) to either standard lifestyle advice or an individualised isometric wall squat prescription, performed 4x2-min bouts three times a week for 6 months.
We assessed deliverability, attrition, adherence and variance in blood pressure (BP) change.
IE was found to be easily deliverable to all participants. At 6 months, 34% had withdrawn. Of those who completed IE, 85% of their sessions were at the correct intensity, meeting our retention criterion for success. Variance in BP change was 14.4 mm Hg. The study was not powered to show a difference in BP between groups; however, BP reductions were seen in the intervention group at all study time points compared with baseline. There were no adverse events related to study participation.
We met our a priori recruitment criteria which allowed us to calculate a sample size (n=542) for a full RCT. The results demonstrate good acceptability and adherence rates to the treatment protocol. Our results show a signal towards a consistent sBP reduction in the IE group compared with baseline.
NCT04936022 (
FreshRSS 