Table 1: SEF score averages of simulation sessions for observers
SEF Items*** | Sim I (n=87) | Sim II (n=82) | Sim III (n=72) | Statistical test*/p | ||||
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | |||
1. | 4.06 | 0.90 | 4.13 | 0.82 | 4.26 | 0.92 | 7.208 | 0.027 |
2. | 3.98 | 0.97 | 3.99 | 0.91 | 4.28 | 0.81 | 8.863 | 0.012 |
3. | 3.97 | 1.00 | 4.22 | 0.67 | 4.37 | 0.76 | 8.976 | 0.011 |
4. | 4.01 | 0.96 | 3.92 | 0.96 | 4.31 | 0.81 | 16.535 | 0.000 |
5. | 3.32 | 1.44 | 3.31 | 1.24 | 4.04 | 1.09 | 29.359 | 0.000 |
6. | 4.00 | 0.92 | 4.11 | 0.88 | 4.29 | 0.77 | 6.540 | 0.013 |
7. | 4.03 | 0.92 | 3.97 | 0.88 | 4.28 | 0.87 | 14.787 | 0.001 |
8. | 4.00 | 0.96 | 4.00 | 0.93 | 4.29 | 0.77 | 10.095 | 0.006 |
9. | 3.74 | 1.15 | 3.58 | 1.14 | 4.18 | 0.98 | 20.164 | 0.000 |
10. | 3.95 | 0.96 | 4.00 | 0.93 | 4.25 | 0.86 | 8.279 | 0.016 |
*Kruskal-Wallis test, | ||||||||
1. This experience will improve my care of patients. 2. I was adequately oriented to the simulation environment. 3. This simulation was a valuable learning experience. 4. This debriefing was a valuable learning experience. 5. The length of time for this simulation and debriefing was appropriate. 6. The objectives for this simulation were met. 7. I would recommend this simulation to others. 8. Completing the simulation helped me understand classroom information better. 9. I learned as much from observing my peers as I did when I was actively involved in caring for the simulated patient. 10. This experience increased my critical thinking skills. |