1

Exploring New Ways To Address Recruitment and

Retention

Innovative Solutions: Robots in Nursing

Education?

Presentation by:

Dr. Carol Holdcraft, DNS, RN, Wright State University

Debi Sampsel, MSN, RN, Nursing Institute of West Central Ohio

Garfield Jones, InTouch Health

March 26, 2008

2

AgendaAgenda

• Nursing Institute of West Central Ohio Collaboration

• Data Driven Research

• InTouch Health Remote Presence Robot Demonstration

• Highlights from Faculty Extender Remote Presence Robot Research Project

• Future Implications

• Questions and Answers

3

Collaboration: • 11 Schools of Nursing• Veterans Affairs • Wright Patterson Air Force Base• Health Care Providers• Businesses

Darke

Preble

Shelby

Miami

Logan

Champaign

Clark

GreeneMon

tgom

ery

Mercer Auglaize

Clinton

Highland

Fayette

Butler WarrenServing 16 Counties in West Central OhioMission

Provide support and leadership for an effective regional RN workforce through innovative partnerships, service, education and research

VisionA nationally recognized regional RN work-force providing safe, accessible, quality healthcare

Nursing Nursing Institute of Institute of

West Central West Central OhioOhio

4

State of State of Ohio Ohio

Nursing Nursing ProjectionsProjections

60,000

75,000

90,000

105,000

120,000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

SupplyDemand

We are here

Ohio will be short 32,000 nurses by 2020

5

Local Local Supply/ Supply/ Demand Demand

StudyStudy

Reengineered a 20 year old national HRSA Model to create first ever regional workforce prediction model

• 38% RN Shortage by 2020

2005 2010 2015 2020Year

Nur

ses

(x 1

00

0)

Nur

sing

Fac

ulty

(x

10

0)20

18

16

14

12

10

16

15

14

13

DemandSupplyFaculty

FTE RN Shortage3,550 4,250 5,750 7,400

Growing RN Shortage

Declining Faculty

The Perfect Storm is Brewing Forecast Bleak

6

So What’s So What’s To Be To Be

Done???Done???

Answer:A futuristic approach to testing models and

implementing new programs for the nursing students, nursing workforce,

and faculty

7

Faculty Nurse Faculty Nurse Extender Extender

ProjectProject

Remote Presence

Robot (RP7)

Demonstration

8

One Possible One Possible Solution to Solution to

Address Faculty Address Faculty ShortageShortage

Remote Presence Robot Faculty Extender Research Study

• 8 pre-licensure RN programs participated (Rural, Community, Urban – ADN & BSN)

• Subjects – 10 experienced nurse faculty – 82 nursing students (all levels)

1st year students = 14

2nd year students = 30

3rd year students = 21

4th year students = 17

9

Purpose of Research

Gathering impressions from faculty and students about usefulness of the remote presence robot as a faculty extender in clinical simulation learning

10

Objectives of This Study

• Evaluate faculty’s acceptance of the use of a remote robot for education and training of nursing students

• Evaluate nursing students’ acceptance of receiving clinical instruction via a remote presence robot

• Evaluate ergonomics application for nursing education and training

11

Study Study MethodsMethods

• Selection

Experienced and qualified faculty recruited from RN programs

• Training

Robot operation and simulation scenario orientation

• Scheduling and student volunteers

• Pre/Post survey data & video recording of sessions

1212

What was your initial

reaction about the

robot?

0%

100%

Initial Reaction About Robot

Results 0% 0% 30% 50% 20%

1 Unfavorable 2 3 45

Favorable

Unfavorable Favorable

1313

0%

100%

Could robot be useful as a faculty extender?

Results 0% 10% 10% 20% 60%

1Not Useful

2 3 45

Very Useful

Not useful Very usefulDo you think a robot could be used as a faculty extender?

1414

0%

100%

Was remote presence robot effective?

Results 0% 0% 10% 40% 50%

1Not effective

2 3 45

Very effective

Not effective Very effective

Was the robot effective?

1515

0%

100%

Were you satisfied with this study?

Results 0% 0% 10% 40% 50%

1 Not satisfied

2 3 45

Very

Not satisfied Very satisfied

Were you satisfied with this study?

1616

0%

100%

Was exploratory study user friendly?

Results 0% 0% 10% 40% 50%

1 No

2 3 45

Yes

No YesDid you find the

exploratory study to be friendly?

17

Faculty’s Faculty’s Additional Additional FindingsFindings

Positive Faculty Comments

Enjoyed working with high technology

Conducive to good interaction with students

Created a positive learning experience

Received good support and assistance

Supported potential use of robot off-site

18

Conclusion from Faculty Data Analysis

• Initial reaction of the faculty about robot was medium to favorable

• After the study, 82% of the faculty showed high or very high acceptance of the use of remote robot for education and training of nursing students.

1919

0%

100%

SQN1: Initial Reaction About Robot

Results 2% 3% 9% 41% 45%

1Unfavorable

2 3 45

Favorable

Unfavorable FavorableWhat was your initial reaction about the robot?

2020

Do you think a robot could be used as a

faculty extender?

0%

100%

SQN2: Could robot be useful as a faculty extender?

Results 1% 4% 11% 38% 46%

1Not Useful

2 3 45

Very Useful

Not useful Very useful

2121

Was the remote presence robot effective as an

instructor?

0%

100%

SQN3: Was remote presence robot effective?

Results 1% 5% 13% 44% 37%

1Not effective

2 3 45

Very effective

Not effective Very effective

2222

Did you find the

exploratory study to be

user friendly?

0%

100%

SQN4: Was exploratory study user friendly?

Results 1% 2% 5% 40% 52%

1 No

2 3 45

Yes

No Yes

2323

Were you satisfied with

this classroom

experience?

0%

100%

SQN5: Were you satisfied with this classroom experience?

Results 3% 0% 9% 33% 55%

1 Not satisfied

2 3 45

Very satisfied

Not satisfied Very satisfied

2424

Students’Acceptance

Ratings

0%

100%

Student Acceptance Analysis

% Acceptance 1% 3% 9% 39% 48%

1Very low

acceptance

2Low

acceptance

3Medium

acceptance

4High

acceptance

5Very high

acceptance

25

Conclusion of the student data

analysis based on the acceptance

criteria

• 48% had very high

acceptance

• 39% had high acceptance

• 9% had medium acceptance

• 3% had low acceptance

• 1% had very low acceptance

26

Students’ Students’ AdditionalAdditionalFindingsFindings

Students’ Positive Comments • Encouraged to think independently

with faculty supervision which reduced stress

• Enjoyed working with advanced technology such as the robot and simulator

• Good environmental learning without stress

• Will create opportunity for distance learning

• This study demonstrated the focus on learning process rather than techniques in a regular lab.

27

Overall Study

Conclusion

Preliminary study demonstrated

that both participants, faculty

and students, gave high

acceptance rating for the use of

remote presence robot as a

faculty extender technology for

teaching nursing courses.

28

Recommendations for Recommendations for improvementimprovement

Faculty and Student Recommendations

– Develop and improve training scenarios (all)

– Improve audio communication (all)

– Provide more space for robot mobility (all)

– Improve back-and-forth interaction with faculty (3rd)

– Better vision (wide angle) for the robot (all)

– Provide video replay for training (2nd)

– Reduce class size for better training (4th)

29

Future Study Future Study QuestionsQuestions

• Can expert faculty be used via the robot to serve as teaching mentors to novice faculty and teaching assistants?

• Can expert nurse clinicians be linked to learners via the RP7 robot for nursing rounds or other learning experiences?

3030

Remote Presence Robots in

Educational and Clinical Settings

Other RP7 Applications

• Nursing Beta Testing

Geriatric rounds

Long distant care family visits

Case Studies

Chart reviews

JCAHO & State survey readiness monitor

• Physicians’ Usage – e.g. Stroke Network

• Faculty –Student Research Study (8 Programs of Nursing & 82 Students)

3131

Remote Presence Robots in

Educational and Clinical Settings

Other RP7 Applications

• National Science Foundation Grant Pursuits

• Military – Government applications

• Civilian health care provider and academia partner plans

• Corporate links

32

Question Question and Answer and Answer

SessionSession

Future Contact Information

Carol Holdcraft, DNS, RNAssistant Dean College ofNursing and Health Wright State University68 University Hall3640 Colonel Glenn Hwy.Dayton, OH 45435-0001937-775-3131 Debi Sampsel, MSN, RNExecutive DirectorNursing Institute of West Central Ohio 015 University Hall3640 Colonel Glenn Hwy.Dayton, OH 45435-0001937-775-3940

Many thanks goes to Congressman David Hobson

and Senator George Voinovich for the federal appropriations monies for the NIWCO and to

the sustainability partners Wright State University,

Premier Health System, Sinclair Community College.