Exploring New Avenues in Advanced Practice Nursing Education

simulation lab photos overlaid by advanced practice ahead yield sign

A growing and aging population, large numbers of students and competition for clinical sites have created a “traffic jam” in advanced practice nursing (APN) education. At the same time, with a growing provider shortage, it’s more important than ever that the profession efficiently produces well-prepared providers.

GW Nursing Dean Pamela Jeffries describes the state of nurse practitioner (NP) education as a “traffic jam” due to the lack of available clinical sites and the larger number of NP students compared to medical students. Many nursing leaders across the nation this year have taken steps to clear the roads, turning to simulation to supplement clinical education hours as another avenue to provide the clinical practice hours and competency testing for NP students. While accrediting organizations require that NP students undertake a minimum of 500 direct patient care clinical hours to prepare for their future role, many programs require hundreds more clinical hours. Simulation offers a way to clear congestion at clinical sites while ensuring students are prepared to deliver high-quality care.

 Health care simulation experts from professional organizations, schools and technology companies gathered in January of this year in Washington, D.C., to discuss how best to evaluate health care simulation in NP programs.

Hosted by the National Organization for Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF) and GW Nursing, the Thought Leaders’ Summit on Simulation in NP Education examined existing evidence, discussed the challenges of evaluation and began formulating next steps.

Then in March, more than 100 nursing educators attended GW Nursing’s second annual simulation conference, which this year focused on simulation in NP education.

State of the science

While a framework for the effective use of simulation is established at the pre-licensure nursing level, little evidence exists regarding simulation’s use in APN programs. 

NP education is fundamentally different from pre-licensure education and requires an entirely different approach from the established framework at the undergraduate level, said Mary Beth Bigley, CEO of NONPF.

“When we get to this level of education, standardized patient encounters have more value because it evaluates those higher-level skills,” Dr. Bigley said.

Carla Nye, clinical associate professor at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, and Suzanne Campbell, associate professor at The University of British Columbia School of Nursing, previously surveyed the research related to simulation in NP education. Their examination of literature produced between 2010 and April 2015 found that a minimal number of research studies had been completed, the quality of studies was low, the studies used small sample sizes, the use of existing International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL) standards wasn’t known and there was a lack of standardized scenarios. An update of their work looking at research published between 2015 and 2019 did not show much improvement in the state of the science, Drs. Nye and Campbell said.

Despite its flaws, the existing body of research does offer promising outcomes, according to Drs. Nye and Campbell: Students like simulation and see its value; students self-report more confidence; simulation learning can be transferred to clinical settings; and simulation can improve communication skills. 

Drs. Nye and Campbell also conducted their own inquiry to describe the current use of simulation in advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) programs. The study was born of the research arm of a Simulation in Advanced Practice Nursing Task Force organized after discussions about APN simulation at the 2016 INACSL annual conference. 

Results of a descriptive survey sent to all APN programs in the United States and Canada show that a majority of the programs employed simulation up to 20 hours, with participants reporting a wide range of zero to more than 100 hours. Simulation is most frequently implemented in physical assessment courses, their survey showed, but it was also used in many other courses.

Schools most frequently reported using standardized patients (SPs), but the use of manikins, computer and virtual simulation, task trainers, interprofessional simulation, video recording and distance/telehealth was also reported. 

This survey also showed that 98 percent of respondents reported using simulation in their APN programs, and 77 percent of respondents supported the replacement of some percentage of clinical hours with simulation. Drs. Nye and Campbell stressed survey participants who chose to complete the survey may have a pro-simulation bias.

When we get to this level of education,
standardized patient encounters have more value because it evaluates those higher-level skills.”

Mary Beth Bigley

Barriers

The survey study conducted by Drs. Nye and Campbell found that faculty skill and staff support were the most reported barriers to simulation use. Programs reported additional barriers to simulation use in APN programs, such as an inconsistent course-by-course approach to simulation, an increase in student fees to pay for resources, competition with undergraduate simulation resources and distance education. 

In small working groups, summit attendees identified forces that inhibit the adoption of simulation in achieving NP competencies. Lack of resources and equity of resources between programs led the list, with limited faculty knowledge and skills and a dearth of peer-reviewed literature also emerging as major areas of concern.

Educators evaluate an NP student’s ability to obtain a patient health history, conduct a physical exam, work through a diagnosis and create a management plan. All of these skills are based on critical thinking rather than manual skills, Dr. Bigley said.

Standardized patients are considered the highest-fidelity level of simulation, but the resources required to both train and pay SPs were repeatedly cited as a barrier. 

NP education is already undergoing a major shift, with programs working toward compliance with the goal of a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) as the entry to practice by 2025. 

“NONPF is committed to the DNP as the entry degree by 2025. NP practice should be at the DNP level,” said Lorna Finnegan, executive associate dean at the University of Illinois at Chicago and NONPF president.

Need for adoption

Despite the challenges and complications, NP educators agree that simulation will only grow in its value to the field. 

Emerging evidence shows that learning does occur during simulation experiences, said Angela McNelis, associate dean for scholarship, innovation and clinical science, at GW Nursing. 

Reliance on the current precepted clinical model is a challenge to sustain or expand, so educators must focus on maximizing student time in clinical settings and exploring alternative models, she said.

The demands and technology savviness of this generation of learners dominated the summit’s discussions about the need for adoption of simulation. 

Current evidence shows that students report increased confidence, decreased anxiety and communication skills development in simulation scenarios, Dr. McNelis said. 

Faculty members who work closely with students know that simulation works, said Pamela Slaven-Lee, senior associate dean for academic affairs at GW Nursing. “We’re in the rooms with the students, and we see the light bulb come on. We see the learning, we know it’s happening, and we need the research so we can move forward. Our undergraduate colleagues are ahead of us,” Dr. Slaven-Lee said.

Current students are digital natives, Christine Pintz, professor at GW Nursing, said during the panel presentation at the March conference. “These are individuals who understand the simulation process and also want this process,” she said.

Anecdotal evidence also reinforces the openness to including simulation in NP programs, with one attendee sharing that her colleagues call simulation “on-campus clinical hours.”

Moving forward

To address the need for a standardized, efficient, sustainable model for NP clinical education, a team led by Drs. Bigley and Jeffries presented their proposed study on “The Use of Simulation in Family Nurse Practitioner Education.” A white paper with a call to action regarding the need for more evidence to use simulations in NP clinical education is expected to be published later this year and should set the stage for a rigorous study. 

Evidence is needed through conducting multisite studies on NP clinical education to obtain evidence for new models of education. In the current environment, significant shortages of clinical sites, clinical preceptors and financial resources pose barriers to NP education. These barriers create an opportunity for educators to develop new models capitalizing on the strong tradition of preceptor-based clinical experiences and leveraging innovative and evidence-based simulations that meet national competencies and continue to prepare graduates for practice. As noted by Dr. Jeffries, the future can be accomplished if there is a concerted effort to generate evidence through robust and rigorous research on simulation in NP education. The current clinical model faces ongoing challenges and requires new thinking. It is time to be bold and institute new models that include evidence-based simulation. 

AUTHOR Erin julius


Simulation Is The Foundation

Simulation is the Foundation building blocks

Proponents of health care simulation education have said for years that it improves clinician performance and reduces patient safety errors, but until recently they have lacked the data and evidence to share with academic leaders and policymakers. 

Simulation education in health care has advanced rapidly in the past decade, due in large part to the efforts of nurse educators. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) in 2014 released the results of a landmark simulation study, which was followed up in 2015 by the publication of the National League for Nursing (NLN) Jeffries Simulation Theory. GW Nursing Dean Pamela Jeffries’ work as one of the consultants of the NCSBN study and her eponymous theory helped legitimize simulation education in pre-licensure nursing education. 

The NCSBN National Simulation Study examined the role and outcomes of simulation in pre-licensure nursing education. The study provided substantial evidence that simulation can be effectively substituted for up to 50 percent of traditional clinical experience in all pre-licensure nursing courses, under conditions comparable to high-quality, high-fidelity situations described in the study. 

The study results reaffirmed simulation education advocates’ belief in this type of experiential learning strategy while providing concrete data to address concerns held by simulation skeptics. The research team had its own skeptics—they were unsure of how well simulation could supplement traditional clinical experiences in certain areas, including mental health, pediatrics and obstetrics, but the data showed no significant differences as long as the correct simulation technique was used. 

“For me personally, it was those areas that the simulation worked for that surprised me a little, as someone who likes traditional clinical experiences,” said Nancy Spector, the NCSBN director of regulatory innovations and a consultant on the study.

Study results influence state policy

The NCSBN study marked a shift in how nursing schools and policymakers viewed simulation education. Each state’s board of nursing makes its own decisions regarding how much simulation can be used to supplement traditional clinical experiences in pre-licensure programs. After the NCSBN study was published, many states amended their policies and increased the amount of allowable simulation. “The study has had a really positive impact on what boards of nursing are allowing,” Dr. Spector said. There was no evidence before the study, so boards made arbitrary decisions regarding simulation, and some states didn’t allow any amount of simulation to be used to supplement clinical experiences. 

One year after the study was published, the NCSBN convened an expert panel to develop national simulation guidelines for pre-licensure nursing programs. These guidelines included evidence to support the use of simulation and information for faculty and program directors on how to incorporate high-quality, high-fidelity simulation in their programs. 

Since the NCSBN released these guidelines in 2015, more than half of all pre-licensure programs in the country have adopted them, according to a survey conducted by the NCSBN evaluating the simulation landscape. That survey also revealed that high-fidelity simulation use has substantially increased for almost all undergraduate courses since 2010. 

High-quality simulation fosters better student outcomes  

GW Nursing is committed to providing students with high-quality, high-fidelity experiences and has made significant investments in simulation under the direction of Dr. Jeffries, an innovator in promoting and advancing the field of simulation education. 

Recent renovations at Innovation Hall on GW’s Virginia Science and Technology Campus nearly doubled the simulation space available to nursing students. The new Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) center contains 12 patient exam rooms and two acute care rooms, bringing the total simulation space available to both undergraduate and graduate students to nearly 20,000 square feet. 

While the new OSCE space was designed for nurse practitioner students to improve their clinical skills, GW Nursing also recently invested $400,000 in upgrades to make simulation as comparable to a hospital setting as possible for undergraduate students, said Crystel Farina, the school’s director of simulation and experiential learning. Those upgrades include eight new moderate-fidelity simulators (manikins that breathe and have a pulse to practice certain skills, but with fewer features than high-fidelity manikins), new beds, IV pumps, medication dispensing machines and workstations on wheels. The school launched another renovation this spring that will add additional simulation and debriefing space, new technology, a virtual reality space and a simulated operating room.

As simulation director, Ms. Farina ensures that all of the school’s many simulation events run smoothly. Simulation is integrated throughout GW Nursing’s entire curriculum—every course has some sort of simulation experience in it, Ms. Farina said. “My role is to ensure that not only does the simulation continue, but that it’s high quality and meets the standards of best practice,” she said.

Those standards, which are set by the International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL), were developed based on the NLN Jeffries Theory and the NCSBN guidelines. Nursing schools now have a solid framework and explicit standards to guide the development of high-quality simulation experiences. While the virtues of simulation as a teaching strategy are well established, Ms. Farina and other dedicated simulation educators are quick to point out that it’s crucial that students engage in high-quality, high-fidelity simulations. When simulations are conducted improperly, or not in accordance with the guidelines and standards set forth by NCSBN and INACSL, simulation can actually be harmful to students. 

In the early days of simulation use, instructors would purposefully introduce mistakes into a simulation in the hopes that students would catch the mistake, Ms. Farina said. “We didn’t know how important it was to the students’ self-esteem and to their socialization as a nurse if they didn’t catch the mistake,” she explains. 

The NLN Jeffries Theory set forth guidelines that simulation should be collaborative and transparent—the student, simulated patient (if one is used) and faculty should know exactly what’s expected and what the objectives are. 

“There’s no way students can meet the objective if they get caught up in how to program the IV pump,” Ms. Farina said.

Schools that implement high-quality and high-fidelity simulation have seen improvements in student performance and clinical confidence. “Anecdotally, we’re seeing much better outcomes from simulation now that we have the NLN Jeffries Theory,” Ms. Farina said. “Their ability to talk with each other and other care providers is definitely enhanced. Their teamwork is also much better—they’re able to work as a team, and they don’t see things as individual tasks.” 

Dr. Jeffries’ groundbreaking work has influenced nurse educators for years, even before the publication of the NCSBN study and her eponymous theory. Jeffries’ 2007 book, “Simulation in Nursing Education”, was Kellie Bryant’s go-to resource when she was hired as the director of simulation learning at New York University College of Nursing in 2008. 

“From my experience, her book was how a lot of us got started in simulation,” Dr. Bryant said. “I’m talking over 10 years ago when there weren’t conferences or other books or journals—that book was our template for simulation.” 

In her current role as executive director of simulation at Columbia School of Nursing, Dr. Bryant is using Dr. Jeffries’ evidence-based approach to developing high-quality simulations, with a focus on creating simulation experiences that address proper medication administration. “We know that medical errors are a leading cause of mortality and death, and a component of that is giving the wrong medication or the wrong dose,” she explained. 

Dr. Bryant and her colleagues began with manikin-based simulations, then moved on to using standardized patients (actors portraying patients) for students to practice the proper protocols, such as reading a patient’s chart correctly, conducting safety checks, scanning a patient’s identification band and more. “The clinical instructors in the hospital are reporting that students have stronger skills than in the past, and seem more comfortable with medication administration,” Dr. Bryant said. “That’s because of simulation, because of deliberate practice. Students understand the rationale, and realize for each step why it’s important to follow protocol.”

Best practices and certifications for simulation educators

Although Dr. Bryant relied heavily on Dr. Jeffries’ early books for guidance due to the lack of available training opportunities, she cautioned novice educators against jumping into simulation. 

“All schools are realizing that if they don’t have a simulation program or a simulation-based curriculum, then they’re behind the curve,” she said. “Everyone knows they have to use simulation, but people aren’t really prepared to utilize it the best way. You have to be trained, you have to have that theoretical background and you need to know what you’re doing.”

For aspiring simulation educators, that begins with securing support from their school’s leadership as well as procuring funds to attend a training program or conference. “Education is the key—before you can start using it with students and teaching other faculty, you have to know what you’re doing and have that expertise first to utilize it and to teach others,” Dr. Bryant said. 

Without simulation training and instruction on what qualifies as high quality and high fidelity, schools will be out of compliance with the NCSBN and INACSL standards.

Educators who are committed to advancing their simulation knowledge and skills can become professionally certified. The Society for Simulation in Healthcare developed its Certified Healthcare Simulation Educator (CHSE) certificate in 2012 to recognize educators for their expertise in simulation. The certification demonstrates that an individual is committed to simulation and has specialized skills and knowledge.

Nursing schools with CHSE-certified educators ensure that their simulation is high quality and high fidelity, which is key to following the standards and best practices set forth by the NCSBN simulation study and the subsequent guidelines. 

“If you have a CHSE-certified person in your simulation center, you have high quality and high fidelity,” Ms. Farina said. “It really does support what the study was requiring. A lot of schools out there are doing simulations but are completely missing that high-quality, high-fidelity piece because they don’t know the pedagogy.” 

Interprofessional simulation

While nurse educators have advanced the field of simulation and set the standards for assessing clinical skills, other health care professions have also been using simulation technology for years. 

Chad Epps, executive director at the Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Simulation at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, recalls using a simulation-based model for practicing anesthesia during his medical residency program in 2001. “I learned how to use anesthesia on a simulator before I ever did it on a patient,” he said. “That left an impression on me in terms of its potential as an educational modality.”

Dr. Epps pursued his interest in education and simulation as he embarked on a career as an anesthesiologist. He became the director of simulation at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), where he started a program for nurse anesthetists and developed the curriculum, which included interprofessional simulation experiences. In his various simulation educator positions, Dr. Epps has pushed for more interprofessional experiences that mimic real-world clinical environments. 

“We graduate these professional health students, and they go into clinics and the clinical world, and they’re suddenly exposed to all of these other professions,” he explained. “In the past, [these students] never learned anything about those professions so they didn’t know what their role was, or what the other professions’ role was.” 

During his time at UAB, Dr. Epps and his colleagues developed simulation experiences for nursing and medical students that included specific competencies developed by the Interprofessional Educational Collaborative with intentional objectives related to the Team Strategies & Tools to Enhance Performance & Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) teamwork system for health care professionals designed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Studies have shown that hospitals that implement TeamSTEPPS have improved patient outcomes, and Dr. Epps wanted the medical and nursing students to become familiar with that model of communication. 

“At first, students thought [the interprofessional simulation] felt very strange,” he said. “But it got to the point where if we did a simulation with just medical students and the nursing students weren’t there, they’d look around and say, ‘Where are the nursing students, something’s wrong.’”

In addition to increasing interprofessional experiences among health care students, Dr. Epps said he expects to see simulation used more widely among health care providers to improve patient safety. “We shouldn’t just use simulation for students, we should use simulation for practicing professionals,” he said. “The airline industry has done this—if you’re a commercial pilot, you have to go through simulation every six months or you risk losing your license. We don’t have that in health care yet, although we probably need it.” 

Where does simulation go from here?

Simulation-based curricula and the use of simulation have been adopted by the majority of pre-licensure nursing programs. Our work continues in conducting the research to design best practices and to learn more about how simulation-based experiences affect student learning and, ultimately, patient outcomes and quality, safe care. 

AUTHOR meredith lidard kleeman


The Future of Graduate Simulation – Let’s Built It Together

Pam Slaven-Lee speaking at 2019 Sim Conference

AUTHOR PAMELA SLAVEN-LEE

Over my years of staffing, organizing and refining simulation-based learning events and how we use them in nurse practitioner education, I’ve seen learning happen. I’ve watched the proverbial “light bulb come on,” as students examine a standardized patient, or receive feedback from an instructor after an Objective Clinical Structured Exam exercise.

Our undergraduate colleagues, however, are ahead of us in establishing a body of literature to support simulation events and introducing best practices for instituting them. Too often, I still hear of simulation being used for summative assessments rather than formative learning. Experience shows that simulation used in high-stakes testing does not benefit our students and, in reality, can shake their confidence. True learning occurs and confidence is built through a formative use of simulation. 

Now is the time to establish these best practices.

During GW Nursing’s March simulation conference, I invited my graduate colleagues to join us in a simulation consortium, where we can acknowledge challenges before us, share resources and establish best practices. I now broaden that invitation to those readers interested in helping develop the use of simulation in advanced practice nursing education.

Join us and let’s build a future of graduate simulation together.

To get involved, visit go.gwu.edu/simconsortium today.

Pamela Slaven-Lee, DNP, FNP-C, CHSE
Sr. Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
School of Nursing
The George Washington University