36
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Codeveloping a Virtual Patient Simulation to Foster Nurses’ Relational Skills Consistent With Motivational Interviewing: A Situation of Antiretroviral Therapy Nonadherence

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although helping people living with HIV manage their antiretroviral therapy is a core competency of HIV nursing care, no educational intervention has sought to strengthen this competency. Thus, we codeveloped a simulation of a virtual patient (VP) having difficulty adhering to treatment to foster the relational skills that nurses require in such situations.

          Objective

          This viewpoint paper aims to describe the codevelopment process and the content of VP simulation, as well as the challenges encountered and the strategies used to overcome them.

          Methods

          We use a collaborative and iterative approach to develop the simulation based on qualitative evidence, theoretical approaches (strengths-based nursing, motivational interviewing [MI], and adult learning theories), and expert recommendations. We carried out 2 main phases: (1) planning the simulation development and (2) designing the simulation content, sequence, and format. We created the script as if we were writing a choose-your-own-adventure book. All relational skills (behavior change counseling techniques derived from MI) were integrated into a nurse-patient dialogue. The logic of the simulation is as follows: if the nurse uses techniques consistent with MI (eg, open-ended questions, summarizing), a dialogue is opened up with the VP. If the nurse uses relational skills inconsistent with MI (eg, providing advice without asking for permission), the VP will react accordingly (eg, defensively). Learners have opportunities to assess and reflect on their interventions with the help of quizzes and feedback loops.

          Results

          Two main challenges are discussed. The most salient challenge was related to the second phase of the VP simulation development. The first was to start the project with divergent conceptions of how to approach the VP simulation—the simulation company’s perspective of a procedural-type approach versus the clinical team’s vision of a narrative approach. As a broad strategy, we came to a mutual understanding to develop a narrative-type VP simulation. It meshed with our conception of a nurse-patient relationship, the values of strengths-based nursing (a collaborative nurse-patient relationship), and the MI’s counseling style. The second challenge was the complexity in designing realistic relational skills in preprogrammed and simulated nurse-patient dialogue while preserving an immersive learning experience. As a broad strategy, we created a collaborative and work-in-progress writing template as a shared working tool.

          Conclusions

          Our experience may be helpful to anyone looking for practical cues and guidance in developing narrative VP simulations. As relational skills are used by all nurses—from novices to experts—and other health care practitioners, focusing on this clinical behavior is a good way to ensure the simulation’s adaptability, sustainability, and efficiency.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Taxonomy of approaches to developing interventions to improve health: a systematic methods overview

          Background Interventions need to be developed prior to the feasibility and piloting phase of a study. There are a variety of published approaches to developing interventions, programmes or innovations to improve health. Identifying different types of approach, and synthesising the range of actions taken within this endeavour, can inform future intervention development. Methods This study is a systematic methods overview of approaches to intervention development. Approaches were considered for inclusion if they described how to develop or adapt an intervention in a book, website or journal article published after 2007, or were cited in a primary research study reporting the development of a specific intervention published in 2015 or 2016. Approaches were read, a taxonomy of approaches was developed and the range of actions taken across different approaches were synthesised. Results Eight categories of approach to intervention development were identified. (1) Partnership, where people who will use the intervention participate equally with the research team in decision-making about the intervention throughout the development process. (2) Target population-centred, where the intervention is based on the views and actions of the people who will use it. (3) Evidence and theory-based, where the intervention is based on published research evidence and existing theories. (4) Implementation-based, where the intervention is developed with attention to ensuring it will be used in the real world. (5) Efficiency-based, where components of an intervention are tested using experimental designs to select components which will optimise efficiency. (6) Stepped or phased, where interventions are developed with an emphasis on following a systematic set of processes. (7) Intervention-specific, where an approach is constructed for a specific type of intervention. (8) Combination, where existing approaches to intervention development are formally combined. The actions from approaches in all eight categories were synthesised to identify 18 actions to consider when developing interventions. Conclusions This overview of approaches to intervention development can help researchers to understand the variety of existing approaches, and to understand the range of possible actions involved in intervention development, prior to assessing feasibility or piloting the intervention. Findings from this overview will contribute to future guidance on intervention development. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42017080553. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0425-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Computerized virtual patients in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            Educators increasingly use virtual patients (computerized clinical case simulations) in health professions training. The authors summarize the effect of virtual patients compared with no intervention and alternate instructional methods, and elucidate features of effective virtual patient design. The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsychINFO, and Scopus through February 2009 for studies describing virtual patients for practicing and student physicians, nurses, and other health professionals. Reviewers, working in duplicate, abstracted information on instructional design and outcomes. Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model. Four qualitative, 18 no-intervention controlled, 21 noncomputer instruction-comparative, and 11 computer-assisted instruction-comparative studies were found. Heterogeneity was large (I²>50%) in most analyses. Compared with no intervention, the pooled effect size (95% confidence interval; number of studies) was 0.94 (0.69 to 1.19; N=11) for knowledge outcomes, 0.80 (0.52 to 1.08; N=5) for clinical reasoning, and 0.90 (0.61 to 1.19; N=9) for other skills. Compared with noncomputer instruction, pooled effect size (positive numbers favoring virtual patients) was -0.17 (-0.57 to 0.24; N=8) for satisfaction, 0.06 (-0.14 to 0.25; N=5) for knowledge, -0.004 (-0.30 to 0.29; N=10) for reasoning, and 0.10 (-0.21 to 0.42; N=11) for other skills. Comparisons of different virtual patient designs suggest that repetition until demonstration of mastery, advance organizers, enhanced feedback, and explicitly contrasting cases can improve learning outcomes. Virtual patients are associated with large positive effects compared with no intervention. Effects in comparison with noncomputer instruction are on average small. Further research clarifying how to effectively implement virtual patients is needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration

              Background Virtual patients are interactive digital simulations of clinical scenarios for the purpose of health professions education. There is no current collated evidence on the effectiveness of this form of education. Objective The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual patients compared with traditional education, blended with traditional education, compared with other types of digital education, and design variants of virtual patients in health professions education. The outcomes of interest were knowledge, skills, attitudes, and satisfaction. Methods We performed a systematic review on the effectiveness of virtual patient simulations in pre- and postregistration health professions education following Cochrane methodology. We searched 7 databases from the year 1990 up to September 2018. No language restrictions were applied. We included randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized trials. We independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and then compared the information in pairs. We contacted study authors for additional information if necessary. All pooled analyses were based on random-effects models. Results A total of 51 trials involving 4696 participants met our inclusion criteria. Furthermore, 25 studies compared virtual patients with traditional education, 11 studies investigated virtual patients as blended learning, 5 studies compared virtual patients with different forms of digital education, and 10 studies compared different design variants. The pooled analysis of studies comparing the effect of virtual patients to traditional education showed similar results for knowledge (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.11, 95% CI −0.17 to 0.39, I2=74%, n=927) and favored virtual patients for skills (SMD=0.90, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.32, I2=88%, n=897). Studies measuring attitudes and satisfaction predominantly used surveys with item-by-item comparison. Trials comparing virtual patients with different forms of digital education and design variants were not numerous enough to give clear recommendations. Several methodological limitations in the included studies and heterogeneity contributed to a generally low quality of evidence. Conclusions Low to modest and mixed evidence suggests that when compared with traditional education, virtual patients can more effectively improve skills, and at least as effectively improve knowledge. The skills that improved were clinical reasoning, procedural skills, and a mix of procedural and team skills. We found evidence of effectiveness in both high-income and low- and middle-income countries, demonstrating the global applicability of virtual patients. Further research should explore the utility of different design variants of virtual patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Med Internet Res
                J. Med. Internet Res
                JMIR
                Journal of Medical Internet Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1439-4456
                1438-8871
                July 2020
                15 July 2020
                : 22
                : 7
                : e18225
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Research Chair in Innovative Nursing Practices Montréal, QC Canada
                [2 ] Faculty of Nursing Université Laval Quebec, QC Canada
                [3 ] Université du Québec à Rimouski Rimouski, QC Canada
                [4 ] University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre Montreal, QC Canada
                [5 ] Faculty of Nursing Université de Montréal Montreal, QC Canada
                [6 ] University Hospital Centre of Quebec Laval University Research Centre Quebec, QC Canada
                [7 ] Institute of Health and Social Services in Primary Care Research Centre on Healthcare and Services in Primary Care Quebec, QC Canada
                [8 ] University of Montreal Hospital Centre Montreal, QC Canada
                [9 ] Please see acknowledgements for a list of collaborators
                [10 ] Research Centre Montreal Heart Institute Montreal, QC Canada
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Geneviève Rouleau genevieve.rouleau.chum@ 123456ssss.gouv.qc.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1093-6577
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6838-9417
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0617-2861
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0782-5457
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7973-8582
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3711-5234
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7806-814X
                Article
                v22i7e18225
                10.2196/18225
                7391166
                32672679
                30f542c5-e468-4aa8-8a2e-9fe9ad0376d5
                ©Geneviève Rouleau, Jérôme Pelletier, José Côté, Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Valérie Martel-Laferrière, Rock Lévesque, SimforHealth, Guillaume Fontaine. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 15.07.2020.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 13 February 2020
                : 10 March 2020
                : 1 May 2020
                : 3 June 2020
                Categories
                Viewpoint
                Viewpoint

                Medicine
                motivational interviewing,hiv,nurses,education, continuing,virtual patient,simulation,nurse-patient relations,communication

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content45

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors441