The effectiveness of improving healthcare teams’ human factor skills using simulation-based training: a systematic review

31Citations
Citations of this article
157Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Simulation-based training used to train healthcare teams’ skills and improve clinical practice has evolved in recent decades. While it is evident that technical skills training is beneficial, the potential of human factor training has not been described to the same extent. Research on human factor training has been limited to marginal and acute care scenarios and often to validate instruments. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effectiveness of simulation-based training in improving in-hospital qualified healthcare teams’ human factor skills. Method: A review protocol outlining the study was registered in PROSPERO. Using the PRISMA guidelines, the systematic search was conducted on September 28th, 2021, in eight major scientific databases. Three independent reviewers assessed title and abstract screening; full texts were evaluated by one reviewer. Content analysis was used to evaluate the evidence from the included studies. Results: The search yielded 19,767 studies, of which 72 were included. The included studies were published between 2004 and 2021 and covered research from seven different in-hospital medical specialisms. Studies applied a wide range of assessment tools, which made it challenging to compare the effectiveness of human factor skills training across studies. The content analysis identified evidence for the effectiveness. Four recurring themes were identified: (1) Training human factor skills in qualified healthcare teams; (2) assessment of human factor skills; (3) combined teaching methods, and (4) retention and transfer of human factor skills. Unfortunately, the human factor skills assessments are variable in the literature, affecting the power of the result. Conclusion: Simulation-based training is a successful learning tool to improve qualified healthcare teams’ human factor skills. Human factor skills are not innate and appear to be trainable similar to technical skills, based on the findings of this review. Moreover, research on retention and transfer is insufficient. Further, research on the retention and transfer of human factor skills from simulation-based training to clinical practice is essential to gain knowledge of the effect on patient safety.

References Powered by Scopus

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

45957Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

World Medical Association declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects

0
19970Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

AMSTAR 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both

5901Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Recommendations for embedding simulation in health services

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Interdisciplinary simulation-based teaching and learning for healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Harnessing power of simulation training effectiveness with Kirkpatrick model in emergency surgical airway procedures

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abildgren, L., Lebahn-Hadidi, M., Mogensen, C. B., Toft, P., Nielsen, A. B., Frandsen, T. F., … Hounsgaard, L. (2022). The effectiveness of improving healthcare teams’ human factor skills using simulation-based training: a systematic review. Advances in Simulation, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-022-00207-2

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 25

56%

Professor / Associate Prof. 8

18%

Lecturer / Post doc 6

13%

Researcher 6

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 26

43%

Medicine and Dentistry 26

43%

Social Sciences 4

7%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 4

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 20

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free