OBJECTIVES: To understand clinical teaching behaviours and their influence on students' learning from the perspective of undergraduate nursing students.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional, correlational survey.
SETTING: A nursing faculty in Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 120/154 (78%) students from Year 2-Year 4 were recruited according to set criteria.
METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was employed to collect demographic data, and students' perceptions of clinical teaching behaviours and their impact on learning using the Nursing Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Inventory (NCTEI).
RESULTS: Year 3 and 4 students perceived faculty clinical teaching behaviours positively. There was a significant association between clinical teaching behaviours and their influence on students' clinical learning. Teachers' competence rated as the most significant influential factor, while teachers' personality rated as least influential.
CONCLUSION: Participants were able to identify the attributes of good clinical teachers and which attributes had the most influence on their learning. Overall, they perceived their teachers as providing good clinical teaching resulting in good clinical learning. Novice clinical teachers and nursing students can use this positive association between teaching behaviours and quality of clinical learning as a guide to clinical teaching and learning.
BACKGROUND: Nursing students are part of the future healthcare workforce; thus, being aware of their intention to work with older people would give valuable insights to nursing education and practice. Despite a plethora of research on measuring intention to work with older people, a valid and reliable instrument has not been identified.
DESIGN: A systematic literature review of evidence and psychometric properties.
DATA SOURCES: Eight database searches were conducted between 2006 - 2016.
REVIEW METHODS: English articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The COSMIN checklist was used to assess instruments reporting a psychometric evaluation of validity and reliability.
RESULTS: Of 41 studies identified for full text review, 36 met the inclusion criteria. Seven different types of instruments were identified for psychometric evaluation. Measures of reliability were reported in eight papers and validity in five papers. Evidence for each measurement property was limited, with each instrument demonstrating a lack of information on measurement properties. Based on the COSMIN checklist, the overall quality of the psychometric properties was rated as poor to good.
CONCLUSION: No single instrument was found to be optimal for use. Studies of high methodological quality are needed to properly assess the measurement properties of the instruments that are currently available. Until such studies are available, we recommend using existing instruments with caution.
BACKGROUND: Critical thinking is currently considered as an essential component of nurses' professional judgement and clinical decision-making. If confirmed, nursing curricula may be revised emphasising on critical thinking with the expectation to improve clinical decision-making and thus better health care.
DESIGN: Integrated literature review.
METHODS: The integrative review was carried out after a comprehensive literature search using electronic databases Ovid, EBESCO MEDLINE, EBESCO CINAHL, PROQuest and Internet search engine Google Scholar. Two hundred and 22 articles from January 1980 to end of 2015 were retrieved. All studies evaluating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, published in English language with nurses or nursing students as the study population, were included. No qualitative studies were found investigating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, while 10 quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria and were further evaluated using the Quality Assessment and Validity Tool. As a result, one study was excluded due to a low-quality score, with the remaining nine accepted for this review.
RESULTS: Four of nine studies established a positive relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making. Another five studies did not demonstrate a significant correlation. The lack of refinement in studies' design and instrumentation were arguably the main reasons for the inconsistent results.
CONCLUSIONS: Research studies yielded contradictory results as regard to the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making; therefore, the evidence is not convincing. Future quantitative studies should have representative sample size, use critical thinking measurement tools related to the healthcare sector and evaluate the predisposition of test takers towards their willingness and ability to think. There is also a need for qualitative studies to provide a fresh approach in exploring the relationship between these variables uncovering currently unknown contributing factors.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review confirmed that evidence to support the existence of relationships between critical thinking and clinical decision-making is still unsubstantiated. Therefore, it serves as a call for nurse leaders and nursing academics to produce quality studies in order to firmly support or reject the hypothesis that there is a statistically significant correlation between critical thinking and clinical decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: To appraise and synthesize the best available evidence that examines the effectiveness of OBE approaches towards the competencies of nursing students.
DESIGN: A systematic review of interventional experimental studies.
DATA SOURCES: Eight online databases namely CINAHL, EBSCO, Science Direct, ProQuest, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched.
REVIEW METHODS: Relevant studies were identified using combined approaches of electronic database search without geographical or language filters but were limited to articles published from 2006 to 2016, handsearching journals and visually scanning references from retrieved studies. Two reviewers independently conducted the quality appraisal of selected studies and data were extracted.
RESULTS: Six interventional studies met the inclusion criteria. Two of the studies were rated as high methodological quality and four were rated as moderate. Studies were published between 2009 and 2016 and were mostly from Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Results showed that OBE approaches improves competency in knowledge acquisition in terms of higher final course grades and cognitive skills, improve clinical skills and nursing core competencies and higher behavioural skills score while performing clinical skills. Learners' satisfaction was also encouraging as reported in one of the studies. Only one study reported on the negative effect.
CONCLUSIONS: Although OBE approaches does show encouraging effects towards improving competencies of nursing students, more robust experimental study design with larger sample sizes, evaluating other outcome measures such as other areas of competencies, students' satisfaction, and patient outcomes are needed.