Written and Computer Simulation on the Moral Sensitivity of Nurses Publisher Pubmed



Parchami F¹ ; Jackson AC^{2, 6, 7} ; Sharifi F³ ; Parsapoor A⁴ ; Bahramnezad F⁵ Show Affiliations
Source: Nursing Ethics Published:2022

Abstract

Background: Moral sensitivity is the first step towards ethical decision-making. This sensitivity should form a basic attitude in healthcare team members, particularly nurses, toward providing effective and ethical care. This is highlighted in intensive care units (ICUs) where close attention should be paid to patient rights and moral or ethical decision-making. Objective: The present study aimed at determining and comparing the effect of written simulation and computer simulation of a virtual patient on the development of moral sensitivity of ICU nurses. Research design: Randomized controlled trial with one control arm and two experimental arms. Participants and content: This study involved 204 ICU nurses working in hospitals affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, from 2019 to 2021 using a random allocation method. The participants were allocated to three groups comprising virtual patient computer simulation, written simulation, and the no simulation control group. After training based on a Patient Rights Charter, five scenarios, with themes reflecting the clauses of the Patient’s Rights Charter, were written as a computer program and text for the computer simulation and written simulation groups, respectively. Finally, nurses' moral sensitivity was assessed using the Lutzen moral sensitivity questionnaire as pre- and post-tests (immediately and 2 months after the intervention). Ethical considerations: Ethical permission was obtained for the study. All the participants signed the informed consent before the study onset. Results: The study results showed a significant difference in moral sensitivity among the three groups before the intervention (p = 0.003). Immediately after the intervention compared to pre-intervention, the three groups showed no significant differences in this regard (p = 0.056), however a significant difference among the three groups was found 2 months post-intervention (p < 0.001). © The Author(s) 2022.