护理学专业本科生在实景教学与模拟教学环境中学习效果的比较

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20221018-01316

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探究护理学专业本科生在实景教学与模拟教学环境中的学习效果,并进行比较。方法通过方便抽样法,选取北京市4所高校的193名护理学专业本科生为研究对象,采用临床学习环境比较调查表(clinical learning environment comparison survey,CLECS)对其进行问卷调查。采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较差异。结果学生在实景教学环境下的CLECS总分为(80.5±15.3)分,高于模拟教学环境的(76.6±14.1)分,其差异具有统计学意义(Z=-3.03,P=0.002)。实景教学环境在沟通、整体观、评判性思维和教与学4个维度得分高于模拟教学环境,分别为(9.1±2.0)分比(7.5±2.3)分、(11.4±3.2)分比(10.3±3.4)分、(6.2±1.5)分比(5.5±1.6)分和(15.5±3.4)分比(15.1±3.1)分,其差异均具有统计学意义(均P<0.05);实景教学环境在自我效能维度得分为(10.9±2.5)分,低于模拟教学环境的(11.4±2.6)分,其差异具有统计学意义(Z=-2.64,P=0.008)。结论建议护理教师建立临床教学指导原则,将实景教学与模拟教学有机结合以达到最佳教学效果。

关键词: 护理学, 本科生, 实景教学环境, 模拟教学环境, 学习需求

Abstract: Objective To explore undergraduate nursing students′ learning outcomes in actualand simulated learning environment and to compare them. Methods A convenient sample of 193 undergraduate nursing students from 4 universities in Beijing completed clinical learning environment comparison survey (CLECS). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare the differences. Results The total CLECS score in actual learning environment (80.5±15.3) was higher than that in the simulated learning environment (76.6±14.1), and the difference was statistically significant (Z=-3.03, P=0.002). The scores of the four dimensions including communication, holistic, critical thinking, and teaching-learning dyad in actual learning environment were higher than those in the simulated learning environment, with the scores being (9.1±2.0) vs. (7.5±2.3), (11.4±3.2) vs. (10.3±3.4), (6.2±1.5) vs. (5.5±1.6), and (15.5±3.4) vs. (15.1±3.1), respectively, and the differences were all statistically significant (P<0.05). The score of the self-efficacy dimension in the actual learning environment (10.9±2.5) was lower than that in the simulated learning environment (11.4±2.6), and the difference was statistically significant (Z=-2.64, P=0.008). Conclusions It is recommended that nursing faculty establish clinical teaching guidelines that combine actual clinical practice with simulated clinical practice to achieve optimal results.

Key words: Nursing, Undergraduate, Actual learning environment, Simulated learning environment, Learning needs

中图分类号:

金三丽, 黄天笑, 李佳晋. 护理学专业本科生在实景教学与模拟教学环境中学习效果的比较[J]. 中华医学教育杂志, 2023, 43(6): 437-440.

Jin Sanli, Huang Tianxiao, Li Jiajin. Comparison of undergraduate nursing students′ learning outcomes in actual versus simulated learning environment[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education, 2023, 43(6): 437-440.

参考文献

[1] Kaihlanen AM, Elovainio M, Haavisto E, et al. Final clinical practicum, transition experience and turnover intentions among newly graduated nurses: a cross sectional study[J] . Nurse Educ Today, 2020, 84:104245. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104245.
[2] 李顺玉, 王君颖, 谢术娟, 等. 临床护理带教教师带教现状与教师自评影响因素分析[J] .中国继续医学教育,2022,14(19):113-118. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9308.2022.19.029.
[3] Jeffries PR. A framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing[J] . Nurs Educ Perspect, 2005,26(2):96-103.
[4] Villanueva C, Xiong J, Rajput S. Simulation-based surgical education in cardiothoracic training[J] . ANZ J Surg, 2020, 90(6):978-983. DOI: 10.1111/ans.15593.
[5] Yuan HB, Williams BA, Fang JB, et al. A systematic review of selected evidence on improving knowledge and skills through high-fidelity simulation[J] . Nurse Educ Today, 2012, 32(3):294-298. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.07.010.
[6] Hayden JK, Smiley RA, Alexander M, et al. The NCSBN national simulation study: a longitudinal, randomized, controlled study replacing clinical hours with simulation in prelicensure nursing education[J] . J Nurs Regul,2014,5(2): S3-S40. DOI: 10.1016/S2155-8256(15)30062-4.
[7] Gu YH, Xiong L, Bai JB, et al. Chinese version of the clinical learning environment comparison survey: assessment of reliability and validity[J] . Nurse Educ Today, 2018, 71:121-128. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.026.
[8] Olaussen C, Steindal SA, Jelsness-Jrgensen LP, et al. Integrating simulation training during clinical practice in nursing homes: an experimental study of nursing students′ knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy and learning needs[J] . BMC Nurs, 2022, 21(1):47. DOI: 10.1186/s12912-022-00824-2.
[9] Christopher A, Gortemiller T, Zemmer J, et al. Interprofessional healthcare student perceptions of clinical vs. simulation learning through participation in underserved health clinics[J] . Med Sci Educ, 2021, 31(4):1291-1304. DOI: 10.1007/s40670-021-01297-9.
[10] Sullivan N, Swoboda SM, Breymier T, et al. Emerging evidence toward a 2:1 clinical to simulation ratio: a study comparing the traditional clinical and simulation settings[J] . Clin Simul Nurs,2019,30:34-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2019.03.003
[11] Leighton K, Kardong-Edgren S, Schneidereith T, et al. Meeting undergraduate nursing students′ clinical needs: a comparison of traditional clinical, face-to-face simulation, and screen-based simulation learning environments[J] . Nurse Educ, 2021, 46(6):349-354. DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000001064.
[12] Leighton K. Development of the clinical learning environment comparison survey[J] . Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 2015,11(1): 44-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2014.11.002
[13] Badowski D, Rossler KL, Reiland N. Exploring student perceptions of virtual simulation versus traditional clinical and manikin-based simulation[J] . J Prof Nurs, 2021, 37(4):683-689. DOI: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.05.005.
[14] Leighton K, Kardong-Edgren S, Schneidereith T, et al. Meeting undergraduate nursing students′ clinical needs: a comparison of traditional clinical, face-to-face simulation, and screen-based simulation learning environments[J] . Nurse Educ, 2021, 46(6):349-354. DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000001064.
[15] Labrague LJ, McEnroe-Petitte DM, Gloe D, et al. A literature review on stress and coping strategies in nursing students[J] . J Ment Health, 2017, 26(5):471-480. DOI: 10.1080/09638237.2016.1244721.
[16] 孙爱玲, 彭淑华, 张小莉, 等. 护生工作压力与临床实习满意度调查分析[J] . 护理学杂志, 2015, 30(8):73-75. DOI: 10.3870/hlxzz.2015.08.073.
[17] Christopher A, Gortemiller T, Zemmer J, et al. Interprofessional healthcare student perceptions of clinical vs. simulation learning through participation in underserved health clinics[J] . Med Sci Educ, 2021, 31(4):1291-1304. DOI: 10.1007/s40670-021-01297-9.