Effects of MAES© versus traditional clinical simulation on nursing students’ satisfaction, self-confidence, and educational practices
Clinical Simulation in Nursing, cilt.120, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, SSCI, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 120
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.ecns.2026.102073
- Dergi Adı: Clinical Simulation in Nursing
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, CINAHL
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Clinical simulation, MAES©, Nursing education, Self-confidence, Self-directed learning, Student satisfaction
- Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background: Simulation-based learning is widely used in nursing education to foster active learning and clinical competence. MAES© is an innovative, learner-centered simulation methodology that integrates problem-based learning, collaborative scenario design, and reflective practice. However, evidence comparing MAES© with traditional clinical simulation remains scarce. This study aimed to compare the effects of the Self-Learning Methodology in Simulated Environments (MAES©) and traditional clinical simulation on nursing students’ satisfaction, self-confidence in learning, and perceptions of educational practices. Methods: A randomized controlled experimental study was conducted among fourth-year nursing students enrolled in nursing courses at a university in Türkiye during the 2025 to 2026 academic year. A total of 88 students completed the study and were assigned to either the MAES© group (n = 46) or the traditional clinical simulation group (n = 42). Data were collected using the Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale, the Educational Practices Questionnaire, and the Subjective Impact and Satisfaction with MAES© Methodology Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test and chi-square test. Results: Students in the MAES© group exhibited significantly higher self-confidence in learning than those in the traditional clinical simulation group (U = 1199.0, p = .042, r = 0.241). No significant differences were observed between the groups in satisfaction with learning or perceptions of educational practices (p > .05). Students reported highly positive perceptions of the MAES© methodology, with the highest rating for teamwork enhancement and motivation. Conclusions: Both simulation methodologies were effective in promoting positive educational outcomes. However, MAES© demonstrated an advantage in improving students’ self-confidence in learning. These findings indicate that learner-centered simulation approaches, such as MAES©, enhance students’ active engagement and perceived competence throughout the learning process.