Outcomes of Simulation-Based Education for Vascular Access: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simulation training is key to developing skills for vascular access. However, the efficacy of simulation-based education remains unclear. We conducted a well-designed and updated systematic review to investigate the efficacy of these programs. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were researched using the following databases from inception until July 26, 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). RCTs included patients undergoing insertion of central venous catheters (CVCs), peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), and radial arterial catheters. We compared the group that received simulation training with the group that received traditional training. We also assessed the success rate, adverse events, and first-attempt success using a random-effects meta-analysis. The protocol was registered at Protocols.io (dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.biu6keze). Seven RCTs (n=866) were evaluated. The meta-analysis showed that simulation-based education increased the overall success rate compared with traditional education (risk ratio: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.13; six RCTs; 840 participants; I²=0%; moderate certainty of evidence). However, it was unclear whether or not simulation-based education had an effect on reducing adverse events when compared with traditional education (risk ratio: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.63 to 1.58; five studies; 750 participants; I²=37%; very low certainty of evidence) or on raising first-attempt success rates (risk ratio: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.94; three studies; 244 participants; I²=59%; very low certainty of evidence). Simulation-based education may help develop skills for successful vascular access. However, it is unclear whether simulation-based education actually reduces the incidence of adverse events. Fine control of the needle tip is probably necessary to prevent adverse events. Simulation-based education might be required in the future for outcome-based task training.