Abstract
Background
The adoption of immersive technology in simulation-based nursing education has grown significantly, offering a solution to resource limitations and enabling safe access to clinical environments. Despite its advantages, there are still diverse reports regarding the effectiveness of immersive technology. It is crucial to verify the effectiveness of immersive technology in nursing education to inform future educational programs.
Objective
This systematic review aimed to identify the contents of immersive technology–based education for undergraduate nursing students and evaluate the effectiveness of immersive technology compared to traditional teaching methods.
Methods
A literature search was performed using 4 databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science; the latest search was completed on January 19, 2023. The inclusion criteria were as follows: participants were undergraduate nursing students; studies were published in Korean or English; designs included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized studies; and interventions involved virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), mixed reality, or extended reality. Quality assessment was conducted using Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool version 2 for RCTs and the Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies. The main outcomes of the included studies were classified according to the New World Kirkpatrick Model (NWKM), ranging from level 1 (reaction) to level 4 (results). Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software, and subgroup analysis was conducted due to heterogeneity of the results of the meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was adopted for assessing certainty and synthesizing results of the relevant literature.
Results
A total of 23 studies were included, with participant numbers ranging from 33 to 289. Of these, 19 (82.6%) studies adopted VR to simulate various nursing scenarios, including disaster training, resuscitation, health assessments, and home health care; 4 (17.4%) studies used AR technologies; and 15 (65.2%) studies involved virtual patients in their scenarios. Based on the NWKM, the main outcome variables were classified as level 1 (usability and satisfaction), level 2 (knowledge, motivation, confidence, performance, attitude, and self-efficacy), and level 3 (clinical reasoning); level 4 outcomes were not found in the selected studies. Results of the subgroup analysis showed that immersive technology–based nursing education is more effective than traditional education in knowledge attainment (standard mean difference [SMD]=0.59, 95% CI 0.28-0.90, P<.001, I2=49%). Additionally, there were significant difference differences between the experimental and control group in confidence (SMD=0.70, 95% CI 0.05-1.35, P=.03, I2=82%) and self-efficacy (SMD=0.86, 95% CI 0.42-1.30, P<.001, I2=63%).
Conclusions
These findings support the effectiveness of immersive technology–based education for undergraduate nursing students, despite heterogeneity in methods and interventions. We suggest that long-term cohort studies be conducted to evaluate the effects of immersive technology–based nursing education on NWKM level 4.