Original Article

Healthc Inform Res. 2018 April;24(2):97-108.

https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97
pISSN 2093-3681 • eISSN 2093-369X

Mobile Technology in Undergraduate Nursing

Education: A Systematic Review
Hyejung Lee, PhD, RN1, Haeyoung Min, PhD, RN2, Su-mi Oh, MSN, RN3, Kaka Shim, PhD, RN4
1
College of Nursing·Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea; 2College of Nursing, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Ko-
rea; 3College of Nursing, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea; 4College of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

Objectives: This study aimed to identify and systematically review the literature on the use of mobile technology in nursing
education. The research findings could evidence the effectiveness of mobile technology in undergraduate nursing students’
learning outcomes. Methods: Computerized searches were conducted using the Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, Cochrane
Library, and CINAHL databases for relevant primary studies and limited to those between 2000 and February 2018. Only
randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies published in either English or Korean were included
and critically appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Results: Seven RCTs and 7 quasi-experimental studies were iden-
tified. The mobile device and intervention applied varied throughout all the studies. Studies published earlier in the 2000s
found that immediate access to clinical and pharmacological referencing information through the mobile device increased
students’ efficacy in clinical practice. Later studies, which were mostly conducted in Korea, reported that smartphone-based
applications could promote nursing students’ learning motivation and satisfaction but not their clinical skills and knowledge.
Conclusions: We still seem to be in the beginning stage of implementing mobile technology in nursing education due to the
limited implication of mobile technology and inconsistent research conclusions. In the future, rigorous primary empirical
studies are needed to suggest the effective use of mobile devices in nursing education.

Keywords: Nursing, Smartphone, Education, Review, Mobile Applications

I. Introduction ever. The younger generations, including undergraduate

nursing students, live daily lives equipped with highly ad-
In the 21st century, technology is evolving more rapidly than vanced mobile technology, challenging nursing educators to
incorporate mobile technology in education to improve the
Submitted: March 29, 2018 learning outcomes of students [1,2]. Though no clear defini-
Revised: April 14, 2018
tion of mobile technology is confirmed in nursing educa-
Accepted: April 15, 2018
tion, the purpose of mobile technology is often described in
Corresponding Author nursing education as “handheld platforms that incorporate
Haeyoung Min, PhD, RN hardware, software, and communication [2].”
College of Nursing, Gyeongsang National University, 816-15 Jinju-
daero, Jinju 52727, Korea. Tel: +82-55-772-8220, E-mail: haeyoung The personal digital assistants (PDAs) introduced in the
[email protected] early 1990s were initially used to store and manage personal
information; however, they have further evolved into smart
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Com-
mons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by- devices such as smartphones and tablet PCs, the latest ver-
nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduc-
tion in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
sion of mobile technology. These devices have multiuse
features including audio and video recording and web portal
ⓒ 2018 The Korean Society of Medical Informatics
support systems [3].
Hyejung Lee et al

Due to their ubiquity, mobile devices have been proposed ies on the use of mobile technology in undergraduate nurs-
to enhance the outcomes of student clinical learning during ing education. The major learning outcomes of students
clinical rotation and improve student-faculty interactions [4,5]. were evaluated in this review to determine the educational
Nursing students practice in various clinical environments, effectiveness of mobile technology in nursing education.
including acute hospital settings and community health cen-
ters, where close individual supervision by the clinical instruc- 2. Search Strategy
tors is not always available [5]. Additionally, nursing students On February 14, 2018, search strategies and subsequent
tend to use knowledge and skills learned in the classroom literature searches were performed by an experienced sys-
when providing bedside care to patients. Current healthcare tematic review researcher in accordance with the Preferred
emphasizes evidence-based practice to ensure quality care, Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
and mobile devices including PDAs and smartphones can be (PRISMA) guidelines [10]. Literature searches of the Ovid-
considered suitable for immediate access to up-to-date medi- MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL
cal information [6,7]. The use of PDA resources supported databases were conducted to identify articles evaluating
clinical reasoning among undergraduate students by facilitat- the efficacy of mobile education in nursing undergraduate
ing problem solving with reliable information [7]. Mobile- students. The following search terms were used: “{(nursing
based applications further enable more active learning by or nurse) AND (student OR students)} AND (mobile OR
actively constructing knowledge using a wide range of web- handheld OR PDA OR smartphone OR tablet PC OR tablet
based clinical applications. Thus far, various mobile devices computer OR wireless).” For example, we searched Ovid-
with applications have increasingly been used in classroom MEDLINE using the following strategy: {("nursing" [TW]
activities and clinical practicum including e-portfolio in many OR “nurse$1" [TW]) AND "student$1" [TW]} AND ("com-
countries [2,5]. Although numerous studies found positive at- puters, handheld" [Mesh] OR "mobile" [TW] OR “handheld*"
titudes toward and satisfaction with the use of mobile devices [TW] OR "PDA" [TW] OR “smartphone" [TW] OR "tablet
among nursing students [6-8] and barriers to using mobile PC" [TW] OR "tablet computer$1" [TW] OR "wireless"
devices including protecting the confidential information of [TW]).
patients, infection control issues, technical difficulties, short The inclusion criteria for this review were: (1) primary
battery life, the cost of mobile devices, and negative percep- empirical studies, (2) studies involving undergraduate nurs-
tions of hospital staff and patients [2,3]. ing students, and (3) studies reporting findings on mobile
The advantages of mobile technology in nursing education technology implemented in nursing education. The exclu-
have been examined in research using a survey study design sion criteria were: (1) proceedings, discussions, disserta-
and qualitative research methods [4,8,9]. Recently published tions, editorial articles, and reviews, and (2) studies involved
review studies only summarized the studies without criti- postgraduate or other allied health professionals. Only ex-
cal study appraisals or described the benefits and barriers to perimental design studies such as randomized controlled tri-
use the mobile technology in nursing education [2,3]. This als (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies were considered.
makes it difficult to determine the effectiveness of mobile Studies were limited to those published in either Korean or
device use and confirm their educational effects on nursing English between 2000 and 2018.
education. Thus, a systematic review is needed to review and
critically appraise the literature on the implementation of 3. Search Outcomes
mobile technology in undergraduate nursing education. The We retrieved 956 citations from four databases. After de-
findings of this review will contribute to the advancement of leting duplicate citations, the abstracts of 439 studies were
nursing education by improving our understanding of the independently screened by two reviewers using the inclusion
impact of mobile technology and providing an insight into and exclusion criteria. All reasons for exclusion were re-
developing strategies in mobile technology application in corded. The full texts of 88 studies were reviewed and finally
nursing education. 14 studies were identified for data extraction and synthesis
(Figure 1).
II. Methods
4. Data Extraction and Synthesis
1. Aim The data were extracted using predetermined themes of
This systematic review aimed to identify and appraise stud- methods/research design, study purpose(s), sample popula-

98 www.e-hir.org https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97
 Mobile Technology in Nursing Education

Identification Records identified through database searching

(n = 956)

Ovid-MEDLINE (n = 249),
Ovid-EMBASE (n = 370),
Cochrane Library (n = 43),
CINAHL (n = 294)

Records after duplicates removed

(n = 439) Records excluded (n = 351)
- Not written in English or Korean (n = 4)
Screening

- Gray literature (n = 156)

- Review article (n = 19)
- Not for undergraduate students (n = 99)
- Not apply mobile intervention (n = 65)
- Not relevant outcomes (n = 1)
Records screened - No RCT or quasi-experimental study (n = 7)
(n = 88)

Full-text articles excluded (n = 74)

- Not written in English or Korean (n = 1)
- Gray literature (n = 11)
- Not for undergraduate students (n = 3)
- Not apply mobile intervention (n = 4)
- Not relevant outcomes (n = 9)
Eligibility

- No RCT or quasi-experimental study (n = 43)

- No full text available (n = 3)

Full-text articles assessed for eligibility

(n = 14)
Included

Studies included in qualitative synthesis

(n = 14)

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the literature search. RCT: randomized controlled trial.

tion, mobile device and intervention, outcome measures, for quasi-experimental study assess the following domains:
and key findings. The synthesis of the studies was conducted cause and effect, similarity between groups, control group,
by addressing key learning outcomes of knowledge, clinical multiple measurements, dropout, outcomes measured, and
skills (performance), self-efficacy, and student satisfaction. statistical analysis [11]. After independent review, the results
were collected and discrepancies were discussed with a third
5. Quality Appraisal reviewer experienced in systematic reviews. Each study was
All 14 studies were appraised for methodological qual- displayed with its total points and classified into one of the
ity by two independent reviewers using a critical appraisal following categories: low risk of bias as all criteria were met,
tool adapted from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta Analy- moderate risk of bias as one or more criteria were unclear,
sis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI- high risk of bias as one or more criteria were unmet (Table 1).
MAStARI) [11]. The critical appraisal tools included 13
items for the RCT and 9 for quasi-experimental study with III. Results
four possible responses: yes (the criteria are clearly identifi-
able through the report description and assigned 1 point), Of 14 studies, seven were RCTs. The publication years
unclear (the criteria are not clearly identified in the report), ranged from 2006 to 2018. Studies were conducted in five
and no (the criteria failed to be applied appropriately). The countries, and 9 (64.3%) studies were conducted in Korea.
13 items for the RCT assess the following domains: random-
ization, allocation, similarity between groups, blindness, 1. Method/Research Design
treating identically, dropout, intention-to-treat analysis, The quality of the studies varied from high to low risk of
outcomes measured, and statistical analysis [11]. The 9 items bias. The quality of all RCT studies was weak due to high

Vol. 24 • No. 2 • April 2018 www.e-hir.org 99

100
Table 1. Summary and quality appraisal scores of the included studies (n = 14)
Hyejung Lee et al

Year/ Method/ Intervention Study

Study Study purpose(s) Sample Outcome measures Key findings

www.e-hir.org
Country research design (device) quality
Goldsworthy 2006/ RCT To examine relationships 2nd year students PDA (Hewlett • Self-reported: Experimental group had a significant 7/13
et al. [20] Canada between the use of Packard iPAQ) General self- improvement than control group in
PDA and self-efficacy Experimental with software efficacy self-efficacy.
and the preparation group (n = 17) of Elsevier All students reported that they use a
for medication Control group publishing PDA regularly during their clinical
administration during (n = 18) practice; 76% of students used the
medical-surgical PDA more than 5 times during their
clinical practice. clinical practice.
Farrell and 2008/ RCT To investigate Experimental PDA (Hewlett • Quiz: There was no significant improvement 5/13
Rose [12] Australia whether the use of group (n = 41) Packard Pharmacological in pharmacological knowledge in
PDAs enhanced Control group iPAQ) with knowledge experimental group versus control
nursing students’ (n = 35) pharmacology group.
pharmacological database
knowledge during
clinical practice.
Williams and 2009/ Nonequivalent To examine baccalaureate 2nd–4th year PDA (company • Self-reported: Experimental group reported a 7/9
Dittmer USA control group students’ existing students not specified) Preferences higher score than control group in a
[23] pretest- information retrieval (n = 61) For 6 to 10 weeks and behaviors handheld’s helpfulness because of its
posttest practices and to explore associated fast and easy accessibility. No p-value
design their perceptions No number of with e-books was reported.
regarding the use of each group was & Perceived There were significant differences
reference e-books reported but five usefulness of between groups in perceived
housed in a PDA. control and five information usefulness of information resources:
experimental resources lab value e-book, disease e-book,
groups used. drug guide e-book, and clinical prep
sheets.

https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97
 Table 1. Continued 1

Year/ Method/ Intervention Study

Study Study purpose(s) Sample Outcome measures Key findings
Country research design (device) quality
Wu et al. [24] 2011/ Nonequivalent To develop and evaluate a 4th year students Mobile learning • Quiz: Learning Experimental group has a higher mean 9/9
Taiwan control group clinical mobile learning system via PDA achievement score than control group in learning
pretest- system that provides Experimental • Self-reported: achievements and cognitive loads of
posttest learning guidance for group (n = 25) Learning attitude, using the mobile learning.

Vol. 24 • No. 2 • April 2018

design nursing courses based Control group cognitive load, Students’ learning attitudes in
on the repertory grid (n = 23) & acceptance of understanding diseases’ symptoms,
approach. mobile learning classifying diseases, and facing
system patients were improved.
Students’ attitudes toward mobile
learning were positive for easiness
and usefulness.
Kim et al. 2012/ Nonequivalent To develop and evaluate a 2nd year students Smartphone • Self-reported: Self- Experimental group showed a higher 9/9
[19] Korea control group drug dosage calculation application efficacy for drug self-efficacy and better ability in
pretest- training program using Experiment (Android only) dosage calculation, drug dosage calculation than control
posttest cognitive loading theory group (n = 37) for 4 weeks self- Anxiety for drug group.
design based on a smart phone Control group use dosage calculation, No significant differences in anxiety
application (n = 41) Satisfaction for drug dosage calculation between
for program, two groups
Frequency of Experimental group expressed a great
application use satisfaction with program in learning
• Quiz: Calculation effectiveness, satisfaction, and
ability intention to recommend to others.
Abate [13] 2013/ RCT To evaluate the Group1 (n = 12): Podcast using • Quiz & case There were no significant differences 7/13
USA effectiveness of traditional MP3 player study: Retention among groups in multiple choice quiz
academic podcasts in lecture Pharmacology & application of scores and case study scores.
promoting knowledge Group2 (n = 11): course content knowledge 81% of podcast groups had a positive
retention and unsegmented • Self-reported: attitude toward use of podcast in
application of content (non-stop) Retention and learning pharmacology concepts.
in nursing students podcast lecture application of
Group3 (n = 12): attitude

www.e-hir.org
segmented
podcast lecture

101
Mobile Technology in Nursing Education
 Table 1. Continued 2

102
Year/ Method/ Intervention Study
Study Study purpose(s) Sample Outcome measures Key findings
Country research design (device) quality
Choi et al. 2015/ Nonequivalent To verify the effectiveness 2nd year students Smartphone • Self-reported: Experimental group had a higher mean 9/9
Hyejung Lee et al

[21] Korea control group by using video clips video clip Communication score in communication competency

www.e-hir.org
pretest- on communication Experimental recorded based competence and emotional intelligence than
posttest competence and group (n = 45) on scenario & emotional control group.
design emotional intelligence Control group developed by intelligence
of nursing students (n = 42) students
Lee [22] 2015/ RCT To determine the effect of Group1 (n = 45): Smartphone • Self-reported: Mobile application group had a higher 10/13
Korea mobile-based discussion mobile-based application Academic mean score in sub-domains in the
versus computer- discussion (Kakao Talk) motivation, Self- academic motivation, self-directed
based discussion on For 7weeks of directed learning learning readiness, learner-interface
self-directed learning Group2 discussion readiness, Time interaction, and flow state measures
readiness, academic (n = 41): on health distortion, Learner- than computer web group.
motivation, learner- computer education learner interaction,
interface interaction, web-based methods Learner-interface
and flow state discussion interaction, Flow state
Yoo and Lee 2015/ Nonequivalent To compare the 2nd year students Smartphone • Quiz: knowledge of Mobile application group was a higher 9/9
[14] Korea control group effectiveness of student Application cardiopulmonary mean score in post-test knowledge
pretest- learning using a high- Group1 (n = 11): (iStethoscope assessment about lung assessment than human
posttest fidelity human patient high-fidelity Expert by • Checklist: patient simulator group.
design simulator and a mobile human patient Current cardiopulmonary No significant differences between
applications simulator Clinical assessment skills groups were found in clinical
Group2 Strategies • Self-reported: assessment skills and satisfaction of
(n = 11): mobile Publishing) education education.
application satisfaction
Lee and 2016/ Nonequivalent To identify whether self- 3rd year students Self-evaluation • Self-reported: Self- No difference in self-efficacy and skill 8/9
Kwon [15] Korea control group directed fundamental using efficacy, Practice competency between two groups.
pretest- nursing practice using Experimental Smartphone satisfaction Experimental group had a higher mean
posttest a smart phone affected group (n = 40) recordings • Checklist: Skill score in practice satisfaction than
design self-efficacy, practice Control group (Foley competency control group.
satisfaction, and skill (n= 40) catheterization) (evaluation by
competency of nursing lecturers and
students students)

https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97
 Table 1. Continued 3

Year/ Method/ Intervention Study

Study Study purpose(s) Sample Outcome measures Key findings
Country research design (device) quality
Lee et al. [16] 2016/ RCT To identify the effects of a 2nd year students Smartphone • Self-reported: Experimental group had a higher mean 8/13
Korea mobile-based video clip video clip Learning score than control group in learning

Vol. 24 • No. 2 • April 2018

on learning motivation, Experimental (iPad/iPod, motivation & class motivation, confidence in practice,
competence, and class group (n = 36) tablet pc) satisfaction and class satisfaction.
satisfaction and to Control group (urinary • Quiz: No differences in knowledge and skill
explore the experiences (n = 35) catheterization) Fundamental performance were found between
of students unlimited nursing groups.
viewing for 1 competency
week (knowledge and
skill performance)
Chang and 2017/ RCT To identify effects of 2nd year students Self-evaluation • Checklist: Nursing Experimental group showed a higher 9/13
Park [17] Korea self-evaluation using using skill competency mean score in satisfaction and
smartphone recording Experimental Smartphone • Self-reported: communication skills than control
on competency group (n = 41) recordings Satisfaction group.
in nursing skills, Control group (Foley & Learning There were no significant differences
satisfaction and (n = 41) catheterization) motivation between group in nursing skill
learning motivations competency and learning motivation.
Kim et al. 2017/ RCT To develop a smart 3rd year students Smartphone- • Quiz: Knowledge Experimental group showed 9/13
[18] Korea phone-based based •C  hecklist: Skills significantly higher scores on skills
application and Experimental application (video recorded) and confidence in performance than
to evaluate the group (n = 35) using a video • Self-reported: control group.
effectiveness of Control group teaching Confidence in No significant differences between
the application by (n = 38) infant airway performance & groups were found in knowledge and
measuring nursing management Satisfaction satisfaction with the learning method.
students’ learning for 4 weeks
outcomes and (Apple iOS and
satisfaction Android)

www.e-hir.org
103
Mobile Technology in Nursing Education
Hyejung Lee et al

risk of bias, whereas most quasi-experimental studies were

quality
Study

9/9
rated as having a low risk of bias. Among RCT studies, many
studies did not appropriately discuss the aspects of the blind-

groups were found in critical thinking

ness of the treatment group, participants, and researchers

(AEMR system) Nursing informatics groups in overall nursing informatics

and clinical practicum satisfaction.

to treatment. One quasi-experimental study had a high risk
There were no differences between

No significant differences between

of bias from the lack of homogeneity of the two groups and
another showed a moderate risk of bias due to unreliable
Key findings

outcome measures.

2. Sample Population
competency.

The sample sizes for the studies ranged from n = 11 to 45 in

each group. Most studies recruited over 30 students in each
group, and 6 described the sample power in the report. The
students recruited for the studies ranged from the second to
fourth year of nursing college.
Outcome measures

Critical thinking

Satisfaction with
clinical practice,
3rd year students iPad application • Self-reported:

competency,

disposition,

3. Types of Mobile Device and Intervention

Usability of
application

The studies published in the early 2000s used PDAs such as

Hewlett Packard iPAQs (the most popular brand) and MP3,
whereas later studies frequently used smartphones. The
most commonly downloaded application or database for
Intervention

PDAs was drug or clinical reference information. The video

for 4 weeks
(device)

and audio features of smartphones were extensively used in

inculcating the fundamental clinical skills of Foley catheter-
ization. Infant airway management and academic electronic
medical records were also tested in two studies. The duration
group (n = 30)
Control group

of intervention varied from 1 to 10 weeks. The wide varia-

Experimental
Sample

tion in devices and interventions in the studies reviewed

(n = 45)

made the data synthesis difficult.

4. Key Findings
RCT: randomized controlled trial, PDAs: personal digital assistants.
undergraduate nursing

The synthesis of results on effectiveness of mobile devices in

clinical practicum of
control group of the application of
Nonequivalent To examine the effect
Study purpose(s)

a mobile academic
electronic medical

nursing education focused on the following main outcomes:

record (AEMR)
system on the

knowledge, clinical skills performance, self-efficacy, and sat-

isfaction (Table 2).
students

1) Knowledge
No study reported an improvement in pharmacological
Country research design

knowledge in nursing students [12,13], but one found im-

Method/

proved knowledge related to lung assessment [14]. Most stu-

posttest
pretest-

design

dents’ knowledge was evaluated by quizzes developed for the

studies.
Year/

Korea

2) Clinical skills performance

2018/
Table 1. Continued 4

Fundamental nursing skills including Foley catheterization

were investigated to determine whether students improved
Choi et al.
Study

their skills by reviewing the procedures on their own smart-

phones multiple times [15-17]. None of the three studies
[25]

104 www.e-hir.org https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97

 Mobile Technology in Nursing Education

Table 2. Effectiveness of mobile devices in nursing education

Main outcome Study, year Comparison groups Results (effects)

Knowledge Farrell and Rose PDA There was no significant difference between the groups in
[12], 2008 No intervention pharmacology knowledge (p = 0.17).
Abate [13], 2013 Unsegmented podcast There were no significant differences among the groups in
Segmented podcast pharmacology knowledge (χ2 = 4.202, p = 0.122).
No intervention
Yoo and Lee [14], High-fidelity human The mean score of knowledge about lung assessment was
2015 patient simulator higher for the smartphone application group than for the
Smartphone application human patient simulator group (p < 0.05).
Clinical skills Lee and Kwon Smartphone recordings There was no significant difference between the groups in skill
performance [15], 2016 No intervention competency (t = –0.38, p = 0.708).
Lee et al. [16], Smartphone video clip There was no significant difference between the groups for skill
2016 No intervention performance in urinary catheterization (t = 1.194, p = 0.236).
Chang and Park Smartphone recordings There was no significant difference between the groups for skill
[17], 2017 No intervention performance in Foley catheterization (t = 1.64, p = 0.106).
Kim et al. [18], Smartphone application There was a significant difference between the groups for skill per­
2017 No intervention for­mance in caring infant airway obstruction (t = 4.774, p < 0.001).
Self-efficacy Kim et al. [19], Smartphone application There was a significant difference between the groups for self-
2012 No intervention efficacy in drug dosage calculation (t = 3.82, p < 0.001).
Goldsworthy et PDA The mean score of self-efficacy was improved by 3.769 for the
al. [20], 2006 No intervention PDA group (p < 0.001).
There was a significant difference between the groups in self-
efficacy (p < 0.05).
Lee and Kwon Smartphone recordings There was no significant difference between the groups for self-
[15], 2016 No intervention efficacy in Foley catheterization nursing skills (t = 0.94, p = 0.351).
Choi et al. [21], Smartphone video clip There was a significant difference between the groups in
2015 No intervention communication competency (χ2 = 24.88, p < 0.001).
Lee [22], 2015 Smartphone application There was a significant difference between the groups for the
Computer web identified regulation in academic motivation (p < 0.05).
Satisfaction Williams and PDA There were significant differences between the groups for
Dittmer [23], No intervention perceived usefulness of the PDA in the lab value e-book (χ2 =
2009 6.918, p < 0.001), disease e-book (χ2 = 8.764, p < 0.001), drug
guide e-book (χ2 = 9.771, p < 0.001), and clinical prep sheets
(χ2 = 5.559, p < 0.001).
Wu et al. [24], PDA The mean scores for satisfaction with PDA were 4.60 for its
2011 No intervention benefit in learning achievement, 4.60 for its effectiveness in
understanding the learning contents and steps, and 4.68 for
its helpfulness in combining the mobile learning and real-
world contexts on 6-point scale.
Yoo and Lee [14], Smartphone application There was no significant difference between the groups in
2015 high-fidelity human education satisfaction (p = 0.931).
patient simulator
Kim et al. [18], Smartphone application There was no significant difference between the groups in satisfac­
2017 No intervention tion with the use of smartphone application (t = 0.168, p = 0.867).
Choi et al. [25], iPad application There was no significant difference between the groups in
2018 No intervention satisfaction with clinical practicum (t = 1.525, p = 0.134).
PDA: personal digital assistant.

Vol. 24 • No. 2 • April 2018 www.e-hir.org 105

Hyejung Lee et al

reported improved performance in the experimental groups catheterization procedure allowed them to remodel their
as measured with a skill checklist. Infant management skills skills immediately upon viewing their performance [15-
improved in nursing students [18]. 17]. Similarly, communication training using smartphones’
audio-video recording capabilities could improve students’
3) Self-efficacy communication competencies [21]. These multimedia ca-
Self-efficacy in drug knowledge and dosage calculation pabilities of mobile devices can be further incorporated in
improved in two studies [19,20], but efficacy in Foley cath- more complex ways in nursing education to stimulate stu-
eterization skills did not improve in students who used their dents’ learning motivation.
smartphones for practice [15]. Communication competency Pharmacology was the most popular subject in the studies
using smartphone video clips [21] and academic motivation reviewed. This may be attributed to concerns over medica-
using smartphone applications (Kakao Talk) [22] signifi- tion errors in clinical practice. Using a pharmacology data-
cantly increased in the experimental group of students dur- base through the mobile device did not increase the students’
ing the classroom activities. pharmacology knowledge and thus, did not seem to improve
the contextual knowledge retention of students [12,13].
4) Student satisfaction However, the improved efficacy of drug dosage calculations
In majority of studies, nursing students expressed satisfac- might be considered a facilitating factor for better clinical
tion with the mobile technology applied in education and practice in the future [20].
found it useful for clinical learning sources during clinical No improvements in skill competency or knowledge of
practicums [23,24]. However, neither the study comparing Foley catheterization were found in students with mobile
smartphone applications for cardiopulmonary assessment devices [15-17] as evaluated using a checklist, which is a
skills with a high-fidelity human simulator [14] nor that us- more objective skill measure. Unlimited viewing of the
ing an application for infant airway management reported self-performance of student procedures was assumed to be
higher satisfaction in the experimental group students [18]. beneficial due to possible self-directed practice. Strategies to
Using the mobile-device-based academic electronic medical maintain students’ interest in correcting their nursing skills
record did not affect students’ clinical practicum satisfaction still need to be developed because student interest decreases
[25]. over time after repeated views of the clips. The video clips of
communication among students helped increase competence
IV. Discussion in the mobile device groups [21]. Attitudes and communica-
tion skills seem to be rather better modified through self-
With the recent explosion in the use of wireless device, nurs- reflection on the video recordings using mobile devices.
ing faculties have become more interested in incorporating The overall quality of the 6 RCTs was evaluated as showing
mobile technologies into their teaching and learning strate- a high risk of bias due to a failure to appropriately describe
gies. This timely study systematically reviewed the experi- the blind aspects in the treatment and subjects. This is read-
mental studies investigating the effects of mobile technology ily understood because the educational treatments given
on learning outcomes in undergraduate nursing students. to the participating students are not easily concealed from
The overall findings of this review did not provide consistent the other group of students in confined classroom or clini-
results on the improvement of knowledge and clinical skills cal settings. Interestingly, over half the identified studies
of nursing students, but noted students’ satisfaction and were conducted in Korea. The higher computer literacy and
preference for these methods over the traditional teaching possession of smart devices among Korean students might
methods. stimulate nursing researchers to investigate the application
Studies published early in the 2000s focused on the use of mobile devices to education. Three studies investigated
of PDAs and downloaded databases in nursing education. the use of smartphones to enhance the fundamental nursing
Since 2010, smartphones have been quickly replacing PDAs, skills practice of students. This appears to reflect the current
as they have more advanced functionality with a wealth of emphasis on clinical skills in nursing education in Korea [26].
applications. The advanced features of smartphones, includ- The mobile-based applications developed for these studies,
ing text, audio, and images, have changed the way they may such as infant airway management and cardiopulmonary
be employed in clinical and classroom teaching. The re- assessment, were evaluated as effective in student learn-
corded video clips of the students’ performance of the Foley ing outcomes. These studies can be considered as yielding

106 www.e-hir.org https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97

 Mobile Technology in Nursing Education

worthwhile results in terms of creative ways to develop the cooperation during the clinical practicum: an integra-
educational contents. As many mobile applications currently tive review. Nurse Educ Today 2015;35(3):493-9.
lack an evidentiary base [2], the quality and suitability of 6. Mann EG, Medves J, Vandenkerkhof EG. Accessing best
educational contents need to be validated. practice resources using mobile technology in an under-
The weaknesses in the methodologies of the studies re- graduate nursing program: a feasibility study. Comput
viewed allow only a limited overall generalizability from Inform Nurs 2015;33(3):122-8.
their results. Objective measures including standardized 7. Kuiper R. Use of personal digital assistants to support
knowledge test and skill performance checklist assessed by clinical reasoning in undergraduate baccalaureate nurs-
a third party can be better used to evaluate the outcomes ing students. Comput Inform Nurs 2008;26(2):90-8.
of learning and benefit from the implementation of mobile 8. George LE, Davidson LJ, Serapiglia CP, Barla S,
technology, which are needed for future studies. Thotakura A. Technology in nursing education: a study
The younger generations that have grown up in our en- of PDA use by students. J Prof Nurs 2010;26(6):371-6.
vironment of rapid developments in mobile devices may 9. McNally G, Frey R, Crossan M. Nurse manager and
become more motivated to learn when these technologies student nurse perceptions of the use of personal smart-
are incorporated in education. However, apparently, we are phones or tablets and the adjunct applications, as an
currently in the early stages of the implementation of mobile educational tool in clinical settings. Nurse Educ Pract
devices in the nursing education curricula. This system- 2017;23:1-7.
atic review found no support for consistent positive effects 10. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA
of mobile device use on undergraduate nursing students’ Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews
knowledge and clinical skills outcomes. The use in clinical and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epi-
environments of mobile devices loaded with appropriate da- demiol 2009;62(10):1006-12.
tabases may help close the gap between theory and practice 11. Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L.
and enhance the evidence-based practice of undergraduate Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aro-
students. Mobile technology can support innovative teach- mataris E, Munn Z, editors. Joanna Briggs Institute re-
ing strategies for nursing education once rigorous studies viewer’s manual. Adelaide, Australia: The Joanna Briggs
provide consistent results on the pedagogical effectiveness of Institute; 2017.
mobile device. 12. Farrell MJ, Rose L. Use of mobile handheld computers in
clinical nursing education. J Nurs Educ 2008;47(1):13-9.
Conflict of Interest 13. Abate KS. The effect of podcast lectures on nursing stu-
dents’ knowledge retention and application. Nurs Educ
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was Perspect 2013;34(3):182-5.
reported. 14. Yoo IY, Lee YM. The effects of mobile applications in
cardiopulmonary assessment education. Nurse Educ
References Today 2015;35(2):e19-23.
15. Lee SS, Kwon MK. Effects of self-directed fundamental
1. Risling T. Educating the nurses of 2025: technology nursing practice using smartphone videos on self-effica-
trends of the next decade. Nurse Educ Pract 2017;22:89- cy, practice satisfaction, and skill competency. J Korean
92. Acad Soc Nurs Educ 2016;22(3):255-63.
2. O’Connor S, Andrews T. Mobile technology and its use 16. Lee NJ, Chae SM, Kim H, Lee JH, Min HJ, Park DE.
in clinical nursing education: a literature review. J Nurs Mobile-based video learning outcomes in clinical nurs-
Educ 2015;54(3):137-44. ing skill education: a randomized controlled trial. Com-
3. Raman J. Mobile technology in nursing education: put Inform Nurs 2016;34(1):8-16.
where do we go from here? A review of the literature. 17. Chang E, Park S. Effects of self-evaluation using smart-
Nurse Educ Today 2015;35(5):663-72. phone recording on nursing students’ competency in
4. Mackay BJ, Anderson J, Harding T. Mobile technology nursing skills, satisfaction, and learning motivations: fo-
in clinical teaching. Nurse Educ Pract 2017;22:1-6. cusing on Foley catheterization. J Korean Acad Fundam
5. Strandell-Laine C, Stolt M, Leino-Kilpi H, Saarikoski M. Nurs 2017;24(2):118-27.
Use of mobile devices in nursing student-nurse teacher 18. Kim SJ, Shin H, Lee J, Kang S, Bartlett R. A smartphone

Vol. 24 • No. 2 • April 2018 www.e-hir.org 107

Hyejung Lee et al

application to educate undergraduate nursing students form Res 2015;21(2):125-33.

about providing care for infant airway obstruction. 23. Williams MG, Dittmer A. Textbooks on tap: using elec-
Nurse Educ Today 2017;48:145-52. tronic books housed in handheld devices in nursing
19. Kim MS, Park JH, Park KY. Development and effec- clinical courses. Nurs Educ Perspect 2009;30:220-5.
tiveness of a drug dosage calculation training program 24. Wu PH, Hwang GJ, Tsai CC, Chen YC, Huang YM. A
using cognitive loading theory based on smartphone pilot study on conducting mobile learning activities for
application. J Korean Acad Nurs 2012;42(5):689-98. clinical nursing courses based on the repertory grid ap-
20. Goldsworthy S, Lawrence N, Goodman W. The use proach. Nurse Educ Today 2011;31(8):e8-e15.
of personal digital assistants at the point of care in an 25. Choi M, Lee H, Park JH. Effects of using mobile device-
undergraduate nursing program. Comput Inform Nurs based academic electronic medical records for clinical
2006;24(3):138-43. practicum by undergraduate nursing students: a quasi-
21. Choi Y, Song E, Oh E. Effects of teaching communica- experimental study. Nurse Educ Today 2018;61:112-9.
tion skills using a video clip on a smart phone on com- 26. Korean Accreditation Board of Nursing Education. Ac-
munication competence and emotional intelligence in creditation evaluation criteria for nursing education
nursing students. Arch Psychiatr Nurs 2015;29(2):90-5. [Internet]. Seoul, Korea: Korean Accreditation Board of
22. Lee MK. Effects of mobile phone-based app learning Nursing Education; c2017 [cited at 2018 Mar 24]. Avail-
compared to computer-based web learning on nursing able from: http://kabone.or.kr/kabon02/index04.php#.
students: pilot randomized controlled trial. Healthc In-

108 www.e-hir.org https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97