This study aims to evaluate and compare the effects of using standardized patients versus static manikins in nursing education for arterial blood pressure monitoring and stabilization training. The primary objective is to investigate the impact of these two different simulation methods on students' cognitive load, clinical skills, and self-efficacy levels. Arterial pressure monitoring is a critical, invasive intervention commonly performed in intensive care units and operating rooms, requiring a high degree of precision. While traditional technical skill assessments usually focus solely on procedural success scores or completion speed, this study utilizes the framework of Cognitive Load Theory to examine the mental toll (intrinsic, extrinsic, and germane load) and psychological readiness (self-efficacy) experienced by nursing students during the procedure. The study will be conducted as a randomized controlled experimental trial with 3rd-year nursing students who have successfully completed their Medical-Surgical Nursing course. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group: The Experimental Group will receive theoretical and practical training, followed by performing the arterial pressure monitoring line stabilization on a "Standardized Patient" (an experienced healthcare professional acting a scenario with a moving limb to mimic real clinical chaos without any actual invasive intervention). The Control Group will receive the same training but will perform the stabilization procedure on a traditional static medical manikin. Data will be collected using a Descriptive Information and Performance Recording Form (to measure procedural time and error rates), the Cognitive Load Scale, and the Self-Efficacy Scale for Clinical Skills. Measurements will be taken at baseline (pre-test) and immediately after the intervention (post-test). The findings of this study are expected to provide evidence-based guidance for developing "mind-friendly" nursing curricula and safer, more realistic simulation protocols that enhance student self-efficacy while ensuring patient safety before entering actual clinical environments.
Age range
20 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
Cognitive Load Level
Timeframe: Within the same day, immediately after the completion of the simulation procedure (Day 1)
Clinical Self-Efficacy Level
Timeframe: Within the same day, immediately after the completion of the simulation procedure (Day 1).