Predictors of Nursing Clinical Judgment in Simulation

Evaluating the Application of an EMS Clinical Judgment Theoretical Framework

OBJECTIVES

Clinical judgment (CJ) encompasses clinical reasoning (process of evaluating a problem) and clinical decision-making (choice made). A theoretical model to better define emergency medical services (EMS) CJ has been developed but its use has not been evaluated in EMS training and assessments. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of this EMS CJ model to assess clinical reasoning and decision-making in a simulated environment.

METHODS

In this evaluation, EMS clinician teams (2-3 members) were directed to care for a simulated older adult patient in their home following a fall. Simulations were video recorded, clinician team actions coded, and evaluated for whether proper CJ reasoning and decisions were made. We evaluated CJ in two ways: 1) EMS medical directors' (MD) determination of whether the CJ questions were addressed (MD score) and 2) objective rubric evaluation of CJ questions using the EMS CJ model focused on recognition of appropriate cues, performance of actions, and revaluation after action (rubric score). The CJ questions addressed in this simulation included: 1) Is the patient stable/unstable?, 2) Are interventions necessary before movement?, 3) How should the patient be transferred from the floor?, and 4) Does the cause of the fall require hospital evaluation? Descriptive statistics were calculated, and concordance between the two assessments was evaluated (mean, 95% CI). Percent concordance was calculated with a validity threshold set at 70%.

RESULTS

Four EMS MDs reviewed 20 videos addressing 80 clinical judgment decisions. Overall concordance between MD score and rubric score for CJ decisions was above the threshold at 88.1% (85.0, 91.2). Concordance between MD score and rubric score for each CJ decision was 92.0% (87.3, 96.7) for question 1, 79.9% (71.5, 88.3) for question 2, 95.0% (90.4, 99.6) for question 3, and 85.4% (79.5, 91.2) for question 4.

CONCLUSION

An objective evaluation of CJ decisions using a rubric derived from an EMS CJ theoretical framework demonstrated high concordance to subjective evaluations of CJ made by EMS MDs. This approach may allow for reproducible and objective CJ evaluations that could be used for competency assessment in EMS.

Examining the Reliability and Validity of the ALS Certification Examinations with the Inclusion of Clinical Judgment: An Update on the ALS Examination Redesign

OBJECTIVES

Clinical judgment describes the process an emergency medical service clinician uses to evaluate problems and make decisions in the out-of-hospital setting. As part of the redesign of the Advanced Life Support (ALS) certification examinations, the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians is developing and evaluating items that measure clinical judgment, with the intention of assessing these as a new domain in the ALS certification examinations. In this study, we provide evidence around the redesign by evaluating the reliability and validity of the advanced emergency medical technician (AEMT) and paramedic certification examinations when clinical judgment is included as a sixth domain along with the five current domains.

METHODS

Pretest (i.e., pilot, unscored) clinical judgment items were included as a new sixth clinical judgment domain. We then used the combination of operational (i.e., scored) and pretest items for all six domains and scored the redesigned AEMT and paramedic certification examinations. We evaluated the psychometric properties of these ALS examinations within the Rasch measurement framework with multiple assessments of reliability and validity including item-level statistics (e.g., mean-square infit and outfit, local dependence) and examination-level statistics (e.g., person reliability, item reliability, item separation, decision consistency, decision accuracy). Wright Maps were produced to evaluate whether the examination item difficulty statistics aligned with the candidate ability continuum.

RESULTS

The total population of all examination forms included were 20,136 (AEMT 4,983; paramedic 15,153). The Rasch-based statistics for the redesigned AEMT and paramedic examinations, for both item and examination-level statistics, were well within the psychometric standard values. Wright maps demonstrated that the developed items fall along the candidate ability continuum for both examinations. Further, the distribution of clinical judgment item difficulties fell within the current item distribution, providing evidence that these new items are of similar difficulty to the items measuring the five current domains.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate strong reliability and validity evidence to support that the integrity of the examinations is upheld with the addition of clinical judgment items, while also providing a more robust candidate evaluation. Most importantly, the pass/fail decisions that candidates receive accurately reflect their level of ALS knowledge at the entry-level.

Effectiveness of a Simulation-Based Education Program to Improve Novice Nurses' Clinical Judgment Skills

INTRODUCTION

We assessed the effectiveness of a simulation-based education program to improve novice nurses' clinical judgment skills.

METHODS

A simulation education program was implemented for 21 novice nurses. Surveys were conducted on program satisfaction, learning, and clinical judgment skills before, immediately after, and two months after the program.

RESULTS

Novice nurses were highly satisfied with the simulation education program. The following nine categories were identified as learnings: provide psychological care for patients, conduct sufficient observation, conduct assessment and make judgment based on observational findings, consult and report appropriately to senior nurses, take response action calmly, collect necessary information, acquire knowledge, predict patients' conditions, and make environmental arrangements. The subscale score for theoretical and practical reasoning was significantly higher immediately after and two months after the program than before it. In addition, the subscale for grasping the condition by observation was significantly higher two months after the program than before and immediately after it.

CONCLUSION

The novice nurses learned to sufficiently observe, obtain necessary information, and prospectively assess patients' conditions by taking part in the simulation education program. The subscale score for grasping the condition by observation was significantly higher two months after the program than before and immediately after it. After the simulation program, novice nurses were likely actively practicing nursing; therefore, this program may not be directly responsible for the improvement of these new nurses' clinical judgment. Nevertheless, we found that the completion of the simulation program was correlated with enhanced clinical judgment.

Lasater clinical judgment rubric reliability for scoring clinical judgment after observing asynchronous simulation and feasibility/usability with learners

BACKGROUND

There is strong evidence supporting using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) for scoring learners' clinical judgment during in-person simulation performance and clinical experience reflections. However, a gap exists for using LCJR to evaluate clinical judgment after observing asynchronous simulation.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the reliability, feasibility, and usability of LCJR for scoring learners' written reflections after observing expert-modeled asynchronous simulation videos.

DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

We used a one-group, descriptive design and sampled pre-licensure, junior-level bachelor's learners from the Southwestern United States.

METHODS

Participants observed eight expert-modeled asynchronous simulation videos over one semester and provided written responses to clinical judgment prompts. We scored clinical judgment using LCJR. We studied reliability by measuring internal consistency of 11 clinical judgment prompts and interrater reliability with two raters. This study also investigated feasibility and usability of the asynchronous simulation learning activity using descriptive statistics. Feasibility included time learners spent completing written responses and time raters spent evaluating written responses. Learners reported usability perceptions using an instructor-developed survey.

RESULTS

Sixty-three learners completed 504 written responses to clinical judgment prompts. Cohen's kappa ranged from 0.34 to 0.86 with a cumulative κ = 0.58. Gwet's AC ranged from 0.48 to 0.90, with a cumulative AC = 0.74. Cronbach's alpha was from 0.51 to 0.72. Learners spent on average 28.32 ± 12.99 min per expert-modeling video observation. Raters spent on average 4.85 ± 1.34 min evaluating written responses for each participant. Learners reported the asynchronous learning activity was usable.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse educators can reliably use LCJR for scoring learners' clinical judgment after observing asynchronous expert-modeled simulation. Logistically, learners complete the reflective learning activity and faculty use LCJR to measure clinical judgment in feasible time. Further, participants perceived the asynchronous learning activity usable. Nurse educators should utilize this learning activity for evaluating and tracking observer clinical judgment development.

A concept analysis of clinical judgment in undergraduate nursing students

AIM

To offer a clear understanding of the definition, attributes, antecedents, and consequences of undergraduate nursing students' clinical judgment in the nursing education context.

BACKGROUND

Clinical judgment is a concept with broad uses among healthcare professionals. Its definitions and attributes vary across contexts. There is no established understanding of clinical judgment in nursing students.

DESIGN

This concept analysis was performed using the eight steps of Walker and Avant's framework.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted using search engines and included peer-reviewed articles related to clinical judgment in nursing students.

RESULTS

Clinical judgment in nursing students was defined as the cognitive process exhibited via a nursing action by observation, patient assessment, interpreting, and prioritizing data that lead to responding using the appropriate nursing practice with the patient. Reflection was used to evaluate nursing students' clinical judgment to revise nursing practice. Antecedents included nursing education curriculum, student's knowledge, previous clinical experience, critical thinking, and clinical reasoning. The consequences of clinical judgment were clinical judgment ability, safe nursing practice, nursing care quality, and patient safety.

CONCLUSIONS

This concept analysis gives clear insights into the definition, attributes, antecedents, and consequences of undergraduate nursing student's clinical judgment.

A Proposed Theoretical Framework for Clinical Judgment in EMS

In the prehospital setting, EMS clinicians are challenged by the need to assess and treat patients who are clinically undifferentiated with a large constellation of possible medical problems. In addition to possessing a large and diverse set of knowledge, skills, and abilities, EMS clinicians must integrate a plethora of environmental, patient, and event specific cues in their clinical decision-making processes. To date, there is no theoretical framework to capture the complex process that characterizes the prehospital experience from dispatch to handoff, the interface between cues and on-scene information and assessments, while incorporating the importance of leadership and communication. To fill this gap, we propose a theoretical framework for clinical judgment in the prehospital setting that builds upon previously defined methodologies and applies them to the clinical practice of EMS clinicians throughout the EMS experience.

Identifying factors that nurses consider in the decision-making process related to patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Nurse identification of patient deterioration is critical, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, as patients can deteriorate quickly. While the literature has shown that nurses rely on intuition to make decisions, there is limited information on what sources of data experienced nurses utilize to inform their intuition. The objectives of this study were to identify sources of data that inform nurse decision-making related to recognition of deteriorating patients, and explore how COVID-19 has impacted nurse decision-making.

Methods

In this qualitative study, experienced nurses voluntarily participated in focused interviews. During focused interviews, expert nurses were asked to share descriptions of memorable patient encounters, and questions were posed to facilitate reflections on thoughts and actions that hindered or helped their decision-making. They were also asked to consider the impact of COVID-19 on nursing and decision-making. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, study team members reviewed transcripts and coded responses, and organized key findings into themes.

Results

Several themes related to decision-making were identified by the research team, including: identifying patient care needs, workload management, and reflecting on missed care opportunities to inform learning. Participants (n = 10) also indicated that COVID-19 presented a number of unique barriers to nurse decision-making.

Conclusions

Findings from this study indicate that experienced nurses utilize several sources of information to inform their intuition. It is apparent that the demands on nurses in response to pandemics are heightened. Decision-making themes drawn from participants’ experiences can to assist nurse educators for training nursing students on decision-making for deteriorating patients and how to manage the potential barriers (e.g., resource constraints, lack of family) associated with caring for patients during these challenging times prior to encountering these issues in the clinical environment. Nurse practice can utilize these findings to increase awareness among experienced nurses on recognizing how pandemic situations can impact to their decision-making capability.