Search

• Simulation-based learning positively influences nursing students' perception of their competencies in evidence-based practice (EBP). • Simulation supports critical thinking and encourages the rational use of evidence-based care. • Simulation training significantly improves nursing students' EBP skills and knowledge. • Simulation improves students' perception of EBP and creates a motivating connection to scientific evidence for practical purposes. Clinical simulation provides a safe learning environment and enhances the clinical and non-technical skills of students in Nursing. Meanwhile, evidence-based practice is crucial as it involves utilizing the best available research to deliver high-quality care. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of high-fidelity simulation (HFS) on nursing students' acquisition of evidence-based practice (EBP) competencies. A quasi-experimental study was conducted with third-year undergraduate nursing students using a non-randomized intervention group. Questionnaires were used to collect socio-demographic and academic data and assess students' EBP competence. EBP competence was compared before and after implementing an HFS training program. The results showed a significant improvement in EBP competence after HFS training. Students showed a statistically significant increase in EBP-related knowledge and skills after the HFS training program. HFS enables the improvement of evidence-based practice competency in nursing students. Clinical simulation-based training improves the evidence-based practice of student nurses as it can promote evidence-based practice and thus improve the quality of patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International organizations recognize the importance of evidence-based practice (EBP) for nurses. The objective of teaching EBP in the Nursing degree is to train future nurses on this subject. Different teaching models exist for this, from less active traditional models to more active ones such as the flipped classroom. To compare the degree of EBP competence of undergraduate nursing students after an EBP course, through the application of a traditional methodology versus a flipped classroom methodology. Quasi-experimental study of non-equivalent groups. The study was composed by a group of students who received training on EBP with the traditional model (face-to-face), and another intervention group with whom the flipped classroom model was utilized, using the online teaching platform EBP-eToolkit. The study was conducted with 4th-year Nursing degree students enrolled in the course evidence-based practice, in academic years 2019/20 and 2021/2022. Before and after the course, the students completed a questionnaire about EBP competence (EBP-COQ), and an objective test was given at the end of the year. A sample of 152 students in the face-to-face group (control), and 143 students in the flipped classroom group (intervention) participated. The intervention group significantly improved its competence on attitude (p = 0.01, η 2 = 0.022), skills (p = 0.019, η 2 = 0.018), and global competence in EBP (p = 0.003, η 2 = 0.030), with respect to those who were taught using the traditional method. However, there were no significant differences in the impact on knowledge, neither through the self-report dimension of the EBP-COQ (p = 0.188) nor the final test score, control group 6.89 (SD: 1.35) and flipped classroom group 7.12 (SD: 1.53) (p = 0.206). The flipped classroom model is adequate for the teaching of EBP to undergraduate nursing students. It produced a slight increase in attitude, as well as in skills and global competence in EBP. Nevertheless, this increase was not significantly different from face-to-face learning in terms of impact on EBP knowledge. • The flipped classroom model is adequate for the teaching of evidence-based practice to undergraduate nursing students. • Flipped classroom significantly improved the attitudes, skills, and global competence in EBP of nursing students. • In the dimension knowledge, both teaching models showed positive results, without differences between them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]