Dataset Information

The effect of clinical experience, judgment task difficulty and time pressure on nurses' confidence calibration in a high fidelity clinical simulation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Misplaced or poorly calibrated confidence in healthcare professionals' judgments compromises the quality of health care. Using higher fidelity clinical simulations to elicit clinicians' confidence 'calibration' (i.e. overconfidence or underconfidence) in more realistic settings is a promising but underutilized tactic. In this study we examine nurses' calibration of confidence with judgment accuracy for critical event risk assessment judgments in a high fidelity simulated clinical environment. The study also explores the effects of clinical experience, task difficulty and time pressure on the relationship between confidence and accuracy.

Methods

63 student and 34 experienced nurses made dichotomous risk assessments on 25 scenarios simulated in a high fidelity clinical environment. Each nurse also assigned a score (0-100) reflecting the level of confidence in their judgments. Scenarios were derived from real patient cases and classified as easy or difficult judgment tasks. Nurses made half of their judgments under time pressure. Confidence calibration statistics were calculated and calibration curves generated.

Results

Nurse students were underconfident (mean over/underconfidence score -1.05) and experienced nurses overconfident (mean over/underconfidence score 6.56), P = 0.01. No significant differences in calibration and resolution were found between the two groups (P = 0.80 and P = 0.51, respectively). There was a significant interaction between time pressure and task difficulty on confidence (P = 0.008); time pressure increased confidence in easy cases but reduced confidence in difficult cases. Time pressure had no effect on confidence or accuracy. Judgment task difficulty impacted significantly on nurses' judgmental accuracy and confidence. A 'hard-easy' effect was observed: nurses were overconfident in difficult judgments and underconfident in easy judgments.

Conclusion

Nurses were poorly calibrated when making risk assessment judgments in a high fidelity simulated setting. Nurses with more experience tended toward overconfidence. Whilst time pressure had little effect on calibration, nurses' over/underconfidence varied significantly with the degree of task difficulty. More research is required to identify strategies to minimize such cognitive biases.

SUBMITTER: Yang H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3547784 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effect of clinical experience, judgment task difficulty and time pressure on nurses' confidence calibration in a high fidelity clinical simulation.

Yang Huiqin H Thompson Carl C Bland Martin M

BMC medical informatics and decision making 20121003

<h4>Background</h4>Misplaced or poorly calibrated confidence in healthcare professionals' judgments compromises the quality of health care. Using higher fidelity clinical simulations to elicit clinicians' confidence 'calibration' (i.e. overconfidence or underconfidence) in more realistic settings is a promising but underutilized tactic. In this study we examine nurses' calibration of confidence with judgment accuracy for critical event risk assessment judgments in a high fidelity simulated clini ...[more]

PMID: 23034048

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPsychological factors such as anxiety and confidence that students have in the patient care situation are important in that this affects the actual clinical performance. Students who are just starting clinical practice have a lack of clinical knowledge, skill proficiency, and patient communication skills, so they experience anxiety and lack of confidence in clinical setting. Practice in a safe environment, such as simulation education, can help students perform more settled and competently in patient care. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of high-fidelity simulation experience on anxiety and confidence in medical students.Materials and methodsThis study enrolled 37 5th-year students at Ajou University School of Medicine in 2020. Two simulation trainings were implemented, and a survey was conducted to measure students' level of anxiety and confidence before and after each simulation. Based on the research data, a paired t-test was conducted to compare these variables before and after the simulation, and whether this was their first or second simulation experience.ResultsStudents had a significantly lower level of anxiety and a significantly higher level of confidence after the simulation than before. In addition, after one simulation experience, students had less anxiety and more confidence before the second simulation compared to those without simulation experience.ConclusionsWe confirmed that medical students need to be repeatedly exposed to simulation education experiences in order to have a sense of psychological stability and to competently deliver medical treatment in a clinical setting. There is a practical limitation in that medical students do not have enough opportunities to meet the patients during clinical practice in hospitals. Therefore, in order to produce excellent doctors, students should have the expanded opportunities to experience simulation education so they can experience real-world medical conditions.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual simulation and face-to-face simulation are effective for clinical judgment training. Rare studies have tried to improve clinical judgment ability by applying virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation together. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program on enhancing nursing students' clinical judgment ability and understanding of nursing students' experiences of the combined simulation.MethodsA sequential exploratory mixed-methods study was conducted in a nursing simulation center of a university in Central China. Third-year nursing students (n = 122) taking clinical training in ICUs were subsequentially assigned to the integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program arm (n = 61) or the face-to-face simulation-only arm (n = 61) according to the order in which they entered in ICU training. Clinical judgment ability was measured by the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR). Focus group interviews were conducted to gather qualitative data.ResultsStudents in both arms demonstrated significant improvement in clinical judgment ability scores after simulation, and students in the integrated arm reported more improvement than students in the face-to-face simulation-only arm. The qualitative quotes provided a context for the quantitative improvement measured by the LJCR in the integrated arm. Most of the quantitative findings were confirmed by qualitative findings, including the domains and items in the LJCR. The findings verified and favored the effect of the combination of non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation integrated program on enhancing nursing students' clinical judgment ability.ConclusionsThe integrated virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation program was feasible and enhanced nursing students' self-reported clinical judgment ability. This integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program may benefit nursing students and newly graduated nurses in the ICU more than face-to-face simulation only.

Dataset Information

The effect of clinical experience, judgment task difficulty and time pressure on nurses' confidence calibration in a high fidelity clinical simulation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The effect of clinical experience, judgment task difficulty and time pressure on nurses' confidence calibration in a high fidelity clinical simulation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets