Simülasyonun Sınıflandırılması
Özet
Sağlık ve hemşirelik eğitiminde simülasyon, teknolojinin gelişmesiyle birlikte kağıt temelli vakalardan interaktif ve yüksek gerçeklikli sistemlere doğru evrilmiştir. Alinier (2007), simülasyon araçlarını yazılı senaryolardan (Düzey 0) en karmaşık interaktif simülatörlere (Düzey 5) kadar altı düzeyde sınıflandırmaktadır. Ayrıca simülasyonlar; canlı/yüz yüze, kısmi görev öğreticileri, prosedürel, standardize hasta ve hibrid gibi tasarım modellerinin yanı sıra bilgisayar, sanal gerçeklik ve haptik teknolojilerle zenginleştirilmektedir. Gerçekliğe yakınlık düzeyine göre düşük, orta ve yüksek olarak ayrılan bu yöntemler, öğrencilerin bilişsel, psikomotor ve kişilerarası iletişim becerilerini geliştirmeyi amaçlar. Eğitimcilerin, öğrencinin deneyim düzeyine ve öğrenim hedeflerine göre en uygun simülasyon düzeyini seçmesi, klinik karar verme ve eleştirel düşünme gibi mesleki becerilerin kazanılmasında ve sağlık hizmetlerinin iyileştirilmesinde kritik bir rol oynamaktadır.
Simulation in health and nursing education has evolved from paper-based cases to interactive and high-fidelity systems alongside technological advancements. Alinier (2007) classifies simulation tools into six distinct levels, ranging from written scenarios (Level 0) to the most complex interactive simulators (Level 5). Furthermore, simulations are enriched with technologies like computer-based, virtual reality, and haptic systems, alongside design models including live, partial task trainers, procedural, standardized patient, and hybrid simulations. Categorized as low, medium, and high fidelity, these methods aim to enhance students' cognitive, psychomotor, and interpersonal communication skills. Educators selecting the most appropriate simulation level based on the learner's experience and educational goals plays a critical role in acquiring professional skills such as clinical decision-making and critical thinking, ultimately strengthening healthcare outcomes.
Referanslar
Alinier G. A typology of educationally focused medical simulation tools, Medical Teacher, 2007; 29(8), 243-250. DOI: 10.1080/01421590701551185
Ziv A, Small SD, Wolpe PR. Patient safety and simulation-based medical education. Med Teach, 2000; 22(5), 489–495.
Kneebone RL, Scott W, Darzi A, et al. Simulation and clinical practice: strengthening the relationship. Med Educ, 2004; 38: 1095–1102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01959.x
Summers C. A new medical model: Patients who use their bodies to teach. Erişim adresi. https://vitalrecord.tamhsc.edu/new-medical-model-patients-use-bodies-teach/
Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low- to High-Fidelity Simulation—A Continuum of Medical Education? Medical Education, 2003; 37, 22-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.37.s1.9.x
Rodgers DL. High-fidelity patient simulation: A descriptive white paper report. Healthcare Simulation Strategies, 2007; 1-147.
Neil JA. Simulation in nursing education. Perioperative Nursing Clinics, 2009; 4, 97-112.
Mıdık Ö, Kartal M. Simülasyona dayalı tıp eğitimi. Marmara Medical Journal, 2010; 23(3), 389-399.
Herrera-Aliaga E, Estrada LD. Trends and Innovations of Simulation for Twenty First Century Medical Education. Front. Public Health, 2022; 10:619-769. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.619769
Gaba D. The future vision of simulation in health care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004; 13(Suppl. 1):2–10. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.009878
Miller GE. The Assessment of Clinical Skills/ Competence/ performance. Acad Med; 1990; 63-67.
Anıl D. Tıp eğitiminde ölçme ve Değerlendirme. SD Platform. 2015Erişim adresi. https://www.sdplatform.com/Dergi/836/Tip-egitiminde-olcme-ve-degerlendirme.aspx
Aggarwal R, Mytton OT, Derbrew M, et al. raining and simulation for patient safety. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010; 19(2):34-43. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2009.038562.
Meller G. A typology of simulators for medical education. J Digit Imaging. 1997;10(3 Suppl 1):194-6. doi: 10.1007/BF03168699. PMID: 9268881; PMCID: PMC3452832.
Beaubien JM, Baker DP. The use of simulation for training teamwork skills in health care: How long can you go?. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 2004; 13: 51-56.
Wilks DH. Simulation primer: A basic introduction. 2018. Erişim adresi: https://www.hsc.wvu.edu/media/3047/simulation-primer-wilks.doc
Patel AA, Glaiberman C, Gould DA. Procedural Simulation, Anesthesiology Clinics, 25 (2), 2007, 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anclin.2007.03.006.
Canadian Aviation Electronics Limited. BabySIM Brochure.2018. Erişim adresi: https://caehealthcare.com/patient-simulation/babysim/
Brown WJ, Tortorella, RAW. Hybrid medical simulation – a systematic literature review. Smart Learn. Environ. 2020; 7, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00127-6
Dunn W. Simulators in critical care and beyond. 2004. Society of Critical Care MedicineDes Plaines, IL
Gündoğdu H. Subkutan ilaç uygulama becerisine yönelik tasarlanan bilgisayar temelli simülasyon sisteminin öğrencilerin kaygı düzeyleri ve psikomotor beceri performansına etkisi. Sakarya Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek lisans Tezi, 2017, Sakarya.
Demir M. Hemşirelik öğrencilerinin triyaj uygulama başarısı ve karar verme becerilerinin geliştirilmesinde web tabanlı simülasyonun etkisi. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek lisans Tezi, 2022, İstanbul.
Li L, Yu F, Shi D, et al. Application of virtual reality technology in clinical medicine. Am J Transl Res. 2017;15;9(9):3867-3880. PMID: 28979666; PMCID: PMC5622235.
Rubio-Tamayo JL. Gertrudix Barrio, M, García García, F. Immersive Environments and Virtual Reality: Systematic Review and Advances in Communication, Interaction and Simulation. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2017, 1, 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1040021
Hayward V, Astley OR, Cruz-Hernandez M, et al. (2004). Haptic Interfaces and Devices. Sensor Review, 24, 1,16–29.
Laerdal (2010), Self-Directed I.V. Learning. Erişim adresi: https://laerdalcdn.blob.core.windows.net/downloads/f304/Virtual-IV2-User-Manual-revE-304.pdf
Weinstock P, Halamek L. Teamwork during resuscitation. Pediatric Clinics of North America 2008; 55:1011-1024
