Adele Pei Ning Woon1, Wen Qi Mok2, Ying Jia Shermin Chieng3, Hui Min Zhang4, Patricia Ramos5, Haryani Binte Mustadi6, Ying Lau7. 1. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: adele.woon.p.n@nccs.com.sg. 2. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: mok.wen.qi@ktph.com.sg. 3. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: shermin_yj_chieng@nuhs.edu.sg. 4. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: hui_min_zhang@nuhs.edu.sg. 5. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: patricia_ramos@nuhs.edu.sg. 6. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: haryani_mustadi@nuhs.edu.sg. 7. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Electronic address: nurly@u.nus.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) training in improving knowledge among nursing students and (2) identify the essential features of training. DESIGN: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest and Scopus databases from inception up until 15 October 2019. REVIEW METHODS: Meta-analysis and random-effects meta-regression was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-analysis 3.0 software. The overall effect was measured using Hedges' g and determined using Z-statistics at the significance level of p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ2 and I2 statistics. The risk of bias tool and the Grading of the Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system were employed to assess individual and overall quality of evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Among the 1993 records identified, 14 trials were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in knowledge, with a small-to-medium effect (g = 0.47) in the VR group compared to the control group (Z = 2.66, p = 0.01). Subgroup analyses highlighted that VR training was more efficacious in delivering procedural knowledge to undergraduate nursing students when conducted in multiple, self-guided, short sessions within 30 min and by using low-moderate level of immersion. Meta-regression did not detect significant covariates that influenced knowledge scores. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual reality may be a viable teaching strategy to improve knowledge acquisition, but it is presently suitable for supplementing conventional teaching methods. Nonetheless, VR could complement current pedagogy to address challenges associated with decreased clinical placement opportunities. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required to strengthen the evidence about the effectiveness of VR training.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) training in improving knowledge among nursing students and (2) identify the essential features of training. DESIGN: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest and Scopus databases from inception up until 15 October 2019. REVIEW METHODS: Meta-analysis and random-effects meta-regression was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-analysis 3.0 software. The overall effect was measured using Hedges' g and determined using Z-statistics at the significance level of p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ2 and I2 statistics. The risk of bias tool and the Grading of the Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system were employed to assess individual and overall quality of evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Among the 1993 records identified, 14 trials were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in knowledge, with a small-to-medium effect (g = 0.47) in the VR group compared to the control group (Z = 2.66, p = 0.01). Subgroup analyses highlighted that VR training was more efficacious in delivering procedural knowledge to undergraduate nursing students when conducted in multiple, self-guided, short sessions within 30 min and by using low-moderate level of immersion. Meta-regression did not detect significant covariates that influenced knowledge scores. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual reality may be a viable teaching strategy to improve knowledge acquisition, but it is presently suitable for supplementing conventional teaching methods. Nonetheless, VR could complement current pedagogy to address challenges associated with decreased clinical placement opportunities. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required to strengthen the evidence about the effectiveness of VR training.