Journal of infection prevention · 2026
Simulation of healthcare professional teams in infection prevention and control: A scoping review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Passerini Isabela, Pereira Erica Gomes, Galvão Fernandes Alves Isabela, Padoveze Maria Clara
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are a major public health concern. Although interprofessional education (IPE) is recognized as a promising strategy, there is limited robust evidence demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing infection rates in healthcare settings.
AIM/OBJECTIVE: To identify studies on interprofessional simulation for healthcare teams focused on infection prevention and control (IPC).
METHODS: This scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR checklist and was registered on the OSF platform (https://osf.io/bj6uc/). Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, ERIC, Scopus) were searched, yielding 632 citations. After screening and applying exclusion criteria, 11 studies were included.
FINDING/RESULTS: Among the selected studies, four (36.4%) originated from the United States. Five studies (45.5%) employed simulation practices based on evidence or expert consensus. Seven studies (63.6%) involved teams comprising three or more professional categories. All studies addressed infectious diseases requiring rapid response, mainly COVID-19 (55%) and Ebola (45%). Most (81.8%) used patient simulators. The most frequently addressed IPE competencies were teamwork (90.9%), roles and responsibilities (81.8%), and interprofessional communication (72.7%).
DISCUSSION: Findings indicate a reliance on expert-driven simulation practices and a concentration on emergency contexts. There is a lack of studies evaluating interprofessional simulation in routine care environments, such as primary health care and long-term care. Additionally, the absence of medium- and long-term outcome assessments limits our understanding of the sustained impact of interprofessional simulation on IPC. Further research is needed to support evidence-based implementation in diverse healthcare settings.
AIM/OBJECTIVE: To identify studies on interprofessional simulation for healthcare teams focused on infection prevention and control (IPC).
METHODS: This scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR checklist and was registered on the OSF platform (https://osf.io/bj6uc/). Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, ERIC, Scopus) were searched, yielding 632 citations. After screening and applying exclusion criteria, 11 studies were included.
FINDING/RESULTS: Among the selected studies, four (36.4%) originated from the United States. Five studies (45.5%) employed simulation practices based on evidence or expert consensus. Seven studies (63.6%) involved teams comprising three or more professional categories. All studies addressed infectious diseases requiring rapid response, mainly COVID-19 (55%) and Ebola (45%). Most (81.8%) used patient simulators. The most frequently addressed IPE competencies were teamwork (90.9%), roles and responsibilities (81.8%), and interprofessional communication (72.7%).
DISCUSSION: Findings indicate a reliance on expert-driven simulation practices and a concentration on emergency contexts. There is a lack of studies evaluating interprofessional simulation in routine care environments, such as primary health care and long-term care. Additionally, the absence of medium- and long-term outcome assessments limits our understanding of the sustained impact of interprofessional simulation on IPC. Further research is needed to support evidence-based implementation in diverse healthcare settings.