eesti teaduste
akadeemia kirjastus
SINCE 1952
Proceeding cover
of the estonian academy of sciences
ISSN 1736-7530 (Electronic)
ISSN 1736-6046 (Print)
Impact Factor (2022): 0.9
Research article
Impact of simulation training on pre-clinical and clinical practice: the example of Tallinn Health Care College; pp. 346–357

Jandra Ristikivi, Irma Nool, Kadri Kööp, Urve Kaasik Aaslav

The simulation environment and high-fidelity simulators set new challenges for lecturers. The positive impact of simulation training on the development of students’ knowledge and skills has been confirmed, but little research has been conducted on the factors that are key elements to performance. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of simulation training on the acquisition of students’ skills and learning outcomes in pre-clinical practice and in a practical working environment. The current study is empirical and descriptive, using qualitative and quantitative methods. The study was carried out in 2017–2021. The sample consisted of second- year students and faculty members with simulation teaching experience. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 5 university lecturers and 16 students. The Educational Practices Questionnaire (78 students) (National League for Nursing 2005) and the Creighton Competency Evaluation Instrument (83 students) (Creighton University 2014) were used and 138 students’ practice documentation was assessed. The interviews and documents were analysed using a qualitative content analysis method and the quantitative data were analysed by the method of descriptive statistics. The overall impact assessment of simulation training was visualized by Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Training Evaluation Model (Kirkpatrick Partners 2017). Simulation training improves the ability to establish links, consolidate knowledge and helps to cope with stressful clinical situations. Negative aspects were video criticism as part of the teaching method, lack of clarity for learning outcomes, limited individual feedback and distortion of reality in the clinical setting. The effectiveness of simulation training is influenced by the teaching staff’s competence and the students’ prior experience in the clinical setting.


Alshehri, F. D., Jones, S. and Harrison D. 2023. The effectiveness of high-fidelity simulation on undergraduate nursing students’ clinical reasoning-related skills: A systematic review. Nurse Educ. Today121, 105679.

Aqel, A. A. and Ahmad, M. M. 2014. High-fidelity simulation effects on CPR knowledge, skills, acquisition, and retention in nursing students. Worldviews Evid. Based Nurs.11(6), 394–400.

Bradshaw, C., Atkinson, S. and Doody, O. 2017. Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Glob. Qual. Nurs. Res.4.

Burns, N. and Grove, S. K. 2001. The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, Critique and Utilization. 4th ed. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, PA.

Cant, R. P. and Cooper, S. J. 2017. Use of simulation-based learning in undergraduate nurse education: An umbrella systematic review. Nurse Educ. Today49, 63–71.

Chen, S.-L., Huang, T.-W., Liao, I.-C. and Liu, C. 2015. Development and validation of the simulation learning effectiveness inventory. J. Adv. Nurs.71(10), 2444–2453.

Creighton University. 2014. Competency Evaluation Instrument. (accessed 2017-09-20).

Elo, S. and Kyngäs, H. 2008. The qualitative content analysis process. J. Adv. Nurs.62(1), 107–115.

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K. and Kyngäs, H. 2014. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open4(1).

Fisher, D. and King, L. 2013. An integrative literature review on preparing nursing students through simulation to recognize and respond to the deteriorating patient. J. Adv. Nurs.69(11), 2375–2388.

Giuliano, K. K. and Polanowicz, M. 2008. Interpretation and use of statistics in nursing research. AACN Adv. Crit. Care, 19(2), 211–222.

Graham, A. C., Knopp, A. and Schubert C. 2023. A scaffolded simulation curriculum: translating simulation with standardized patient encounters into clinical practice for nurse practitioner students. Clin. Simul. Nurs., Educ., 77(4), 42–50.

Herlihy, K. 2022.  Faculty perceptions of preparation for teaching pre-licensure simulation: A qualitative descriptive study. Teach. Learn. Nurs., 17(2), 180–184.

Hussein, M. T. E. and Favell, D. 2022. Simulation-based learning in nurse practitioner programs: a scoping review. Nurse Educ. Pract., 18(9), 876–885.

INACSL Standards Committee. 2016a. INACSL standards of best practice: simulationSM facilitation. Clin. Simul. Nurs.12(S), S16–S20. j.ecns.2016.09.007

INACSL Standards Committee. 2016b. INACSL standards of best practice: simulationSM outcomes and objectives. Clin. Simul. Nurs.12(S), S13–S15. 10.1016/j.ecns.2016.09.006

INACSL Standards Committee. 2016c. INACSL standards of best practice: simulationSM simulation glossary. Clin. Simul. Nurs.12(S), S39–S47. j.ecns.2016.09.012

Kirkpatrick Partners. 2017. The New World Kirkpatrick Model 2006 (accessed 2016-08-04).

Leighton, K., Ravert, P., Mudra, V. and Macintosh, C. 2015. Updating the simulation effectiveness tool: item modifications and reevaluation of psychometric properties. Nurs. Educ. Perspect., 36(5), 317–323.

Meakim, C., Boese, T., Decker, S., Franklin, A. E., Gloe, D., Lioce, L.  et al. 2013. Standards of best practice: simulation standard I: terminology. Clin. Simul. Nurs., 9(6S), S3–S11.

Morse, J. M. 2015. “Data were saturated…”. Qual. Health Res.25(5), 587–588.

National League for Nursing. 2005. Educational Practices Questionnaire (Student Version).

Nehring, W. M., Wexler, T., Hughes, F. and Greenwell, A. 2013. Faculty development for the use of high-fidelity patient simulation: A systematic review. Int. J. Health Sci. Educ.1(1), 4.

Pannekoeke, L., Stakkestad Knudsen, S. A., Kambe, M., Ugland Vae, K. J. and Dahl, H. 2023. Ongoing training and peer feedback in simulation-based learning for local faculty development: A participation action research study. Nurse Educ. Today124(5), 105768.

Peters, K. and Halcomb, E. 2015. Interviews in qualitative research. Nurse Res.22(4), 6–7. 

Powers, G. C. 2014. Associate degree nurse educators in New York State report the value of utilizing clinical simulation as a teaching strategy. Teach. Learn. Nurs.9(4), 175–180.

Reierson, I. A., Sandvik, L., Solli, H., Haukedal, T. A. and Eikeland Husebø, S. 2022. Psychometric testing of the Norwegian version of the Simulation Design Scale, the Educational Practices Questionnaire and the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale in nursing education. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. Adv.2, 100012.

Rutherford-Hemming, T., Nye, C. and Coram, C. 2016. Using simulation for clinical practice hours in nurse practitioner education in the United States: A systematic review. Nurse Educ. Today, 37, 128–135.

Sezgin, M. G. and Bektas, H. 2023. Effectiveness of interprofessional simulation-based education programs to improve teamwork and communication for students in the healthcare profession: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nurse Educ. Today120(1), 105619.

Shin, S., Park, J.-H. and Kim, J.-H. 2015. Effectiveness of patient simulation in nursing education: meta-analysis. Nurse Educ. Today35(1), 176–182.

Sterner, A., Nilsson, M. S. and Eklund, A. 2023. The value of simulation-based education in developing preparedness for acute care situations: An interview study of new graduate nurses’ perspectives. Nurse Educ. Pract.67(2), 103549.

Tamilselvan, C., Chua, S. M., Chew, H. S. J. and Devi, M. K. 2023. Experiences of simulation-based learning among undergraduate nursing students: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Nurse Educ. Today121(2), 105711.

Teixeira, C., Pereira, M., Kusumota, L., Gaioso, V., Lima de Mello, C. and Campos de Carvalho, E. 2015. Evaluation of nursing students about learning with clinical simulation. Rev. Bras. Enferm.68(2), 311–319.

Zitzelsberger, H., Coffey, S., Graham, L., Papaconstantinou, E. and Anyinam, C. 2017. Exploring simulation utilization and simulation evaluation practices and approaches in undergraduate nursing education. J. Educ. Pract., 8(3), 155–164.

Back to Issue