Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education in surgery – a scoping review

Abstract Introduction Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education (Sim-IPE) has been successfully used in various health professions and shown to improve communication and teamwork. Surgery, where preventable serious adverse outcomes are often attributed to issues with communication and teamwork, represents a compelling context for Sim-IPE. However, implementing Sim-IPE in surgery requires investment in faculty development, equipment and facilities while incurring the cost of reduced staff availability and theatre productivity during simulation activity. We conducted a scoping review to characterise how Sim-IPE in surgery is practised and researched. Methods This scoping review followed the methodological framework described by Arksey and O’Malley. Reporting followed the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO and ERIC) were searched for records pertaining to Sim-IPE in surgery published after 1st January 2000 and in English. Results The final analysis included 81 articles. Simulation scenarios showed a rich variety of combinations of professions, disciplines, training levels and settings. While most scenarios used manikins ( N = 54, 75%), other modalities included simulated participants, cadavers, task trainers, computers, laparoscopic simulators, role play and animal models with many scenarios using multiple modalities ( N = 20, 27.8%). Of studies reporting on evaluation outcome, almost half ( N = 32, 47.1%) were limited to participants’ views of their learning experience and satisfaction with the program. Few studies reported using educational theory to inform Sim-IPE design and even fewer used theoretical frameworks in the research design. Facilitators for implementing Sim-IPE in surgery included a skilled faculty, institutional support and evidence of benefit. Barriers included lack of protected training time, restricted access to facilities and unreliable ongoing funding. Discussion Studies described a rich variety of Sim-IPE scenarios, including multiple professions, disciplines, training levels, simulation modalities and settings, facilitating training in a broad range of skills reflective of the complexity of modern surgical care. While barriers such as time, funding, and cultural resistance to simulation are commonly reported in the simulation-based education literature, these issues may be amplified in surgery due to surgical service pressures and traditional hierarchies (e.g. surgeon as “captain of the ship”). Overcoming these barriers will likely require structural (policy, funding, scheduling) and cultural (leadership, team identity) change.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Advances in Simulation
Published
2026-07-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-026-00453-8
Primary Topic
Surgical Simulation and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education in surgery – a scoping review

Vijayaragavan Muralidharan, Oscar Morice, Sean Stevens, Debra Nestel et al.
Advances in Simulation
Surgical Simulation and Training
article

Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education in surgery – a scoping review

Vijayaragavan Muralidharan, Oscar Morice, Sean Stevens, Debra Nestel, Deborah Colville, John Paige
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Simulation-enhanced interprofessional education (Sim-IPE) has been successfully used in various health professions and shown to improve communication and teamwork. Surgery, where preventable serious adverse outcomes are often attributed to issues with communication and teamwork, represents a compelling context for Sim-IPE. However, implementing Sim-IPE in surgery requires investment in faculty development, equipment and facilities while incurring the cost of reduced staff availability and theatre productivity during simulation activity. We conducted a scoping review to characterise how Sim-IPE in surgery is practised and researched. Methods This scoping review followed the methodological framework described by Arksey and O’Malley. Reporting followed the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO and ERIC) were searched for records pertaining to Sim-IPE in surgery published after 1st January 2000 and in English. Results The final analysis included 81 articles. Simulation scenarios showed a rich variety of combinations of professions, disciplines, training levels and settings. While most scenarios used manikins ( N = 54, 75%), other modalities included simulated participants, cadavers, task trainers, computers, laparoscopic simulators, role play and animal models with many scenarios using multiple modalities ( N = 20, 27.8%). Of studies reporting on evaluation outcome, almost half ( N = 32, 47.1%) were limited to participants’ views of their learning experience and satisfaction with the program. Few studies reported using educational theory to inform Sim-IPE design and even fewer used theoretical frameworks in the research design. Facilitators for implementing Sim-IPE in surgery included a skilled faculty, institutional support and evidence of benefit. Barriers included lack of protected training time, restricted access to facilities and unreliable ongoing funding. Discussion Studies described a rich variety of Sim-IPE scenarios, including multiple professions, disciplines, training levels, simulation modalities and settings, facilitating training in a broad range of skills reflective of the complexity of modern surgical care. While barriers such as time, funding, and cultural resistance to simulation are commonly reported in the simulation-based education literature, these issues may be amplified in surgery due to surgical service pressures and traditional hierarchies (e.g. surgeon as “captain of the ship”). Overcoming these barriers will likely require structural (policy, funding, scheduling) and cultural (leadership, team identity) change.

Advances in Simulation
Austin Health (AU), Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Surgical Simulation and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.