Systematic review examines digital simulation training's effectiveness for workplace violence preparedness in health care professionals, suggesting improvements for curricula.
Workplace violence is a critical concern in health care and social service education, particularly for students placed in emotionally demanding and high-risk clinical environments. Despite growing awareness, most curricula prioritise technical and procedural competence while neglecting the emotional and interpersonal skills required to navigate violent encounters. This chapter provides a systematic review of digital simulation-based training interventions, examining how they prepare undergraduate health care professionals for workplace violence through competencies such as de-escalation, emotional regulation, and situational confidence. A systematic review of 19 studies published between 2015 and 2025 was conducted. A multi-phase search strategy was implemented across PubMed, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, and WorldCat. Included studies evaluated interventions focused on emotional regulation, de-escalation, or coping strategies delivered through digital simulations, gamified environments, or virtual reality formats. A thematic synthesis was conducted to identify recurring patterns in intervention design, reported outcomes, and pedagogical emphasis. Digital simulation-based education was found to enhance student confidence and perceived preparedness but also revealed significant limitations. Most interventions relied on self-report data, lacked long-term follow-up, and overlooked student identity, equity, and emotional complexity. To address these gaps, the chapter introduces the concept of affective fidelity to foreground the importance of emotional realism in simulation design and evaluation. It offers a critical synthesis of current evidence and provides direction for more inclusive, context-aware pedagogical approaches to workplace violence preparedness in health professions education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lucé Pretorius (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: