The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric: 17 Years Later

BACKGROUND

Nearly 17 years ago, the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) was published to provide a common language and trajectory of students' development to think like a nurse.

METHOD

This article traces the uses of the LCJR from creation to the present and cites lessons learned from its use.

RESULTS

During the intervening years, the LCJR has been used effectively as a debriefing guide in simulation and as a research instrument, as well as for formative assessment. The LCJR has been translated or is in process in 19 languages besides English.

CONCLUSION

This article provides evidence of the efficacy of the LCJR and discusses important lessons learned. [J Nurs Educ. 2024;63(3):149-155.].

The implementation of Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model and the Indonesian version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in the clinical setting

A critical component for nurses to provide safe and quality care with strong patient outcomes is clinical judgment. This study aimed to identify the difference in the clinical judgment score in newly graduated nurses by implementing Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model. This study followed an experimental design with a pretest-posttest and involved thirty-two newly graduated nurses from three private hospitals in Indonesia. The intervention group had a scheduled post-conference with their preceptors using Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model's guidelines with high-level, open-ended questions for two consecutive weeks. Independent samples t-test was used to compare pre-and post-test scores utilizing the valid and reliable Indonesia version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric. There was no significant difference between the pre-test results of the intervention and control groups, with a significance value of 0.647. The results indicated a significant difference in the mean clinical judgment scores between the intervention and control groups after two weeks of intervention, where the intervention group's scores were higher than the control group's with a significance value of <0.001 with a mean difference of 6.75 and CI of 95 % (4.18-9.31). Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model showed a significant impact in increasing clinical judgment scores. The Indonesia version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric is a valuable tool for assessing and evaluating the development of clinical judgment and provides detailed targeted areas needing improvement. Preceptors and nursing leaders in the clinical setting should continue to use this model and tools to assist newly graduated nurses in developing clinical judgment skills during their transition period.

Nursing students' clinical judgment skills in simulation and clinical placement: a comparison of student self-assessment and evaluator assessment

BACKGROUND

Clinical judgment is an important and desirable learning outcome in nursing education. Students must be able to self-assess their clinical judgment in both the simulation and clinical settings to identify knowledge gaps and further improve and develop their skills. Further investigation is needed to determine the optimal conditions for and reliability of this self-assessment.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the same group of students' self-assessment of clinical judgment with an evaluator's assessment in both simulation and clinical settings. The study further aimed to investigate whether the Dunning-Kruger effect is present in nursing students' self-assessment of clinical judgment.

METHODS

The study applied a quantitative comparative design. It was conducted in two learning settings: an academic simulation-based education course, and a clinical placement course in an acute care hospital. The sample consisted of 23 nursing students. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric was used to collect data. The scores were compared using a t-test, intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman plots. The Dunning-Kruger effect was investigated using linear regression analysis and a scatter plot.

RESULTS

The results showed an inconsistency between student self-assessment and evaluator assessment of clinical judgment in both simulation-based education and clinical placement. Students overestimated their clinical judgment when compared to the more experienced evaluator's assessment. Differences between students' scores and the evaluator's scores were larger when the evaluator's scores were low, indicating the presence of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

CONCLUSION

It is vital to acknowledge that student self-assessment alone may not be a reliable predictor of a student's clinical judgment. Students who had a lower level of clinical judgment were likely to be less aware that this was the case. For future practice and research, we recommend a combination of student self-assessment and evaluator assessment to provide a more realistic view of students' clinical judgment skills.

Level of clinical reasoning in intermediate nursing students explained by education year and days of internships per healthcare branches: A cross - sectional study

BACKGROUND

Due to changes in health care nurses are achieving more responsibilities. Globally nurses are trained at different educational levels to become registered nurses. All nurses should be able to implement clinical reasoning in chronic and acute patient care. There is uncertainty in health care institutes about the level of performance of clinical reasoning in the intermediate nurses.

OBJECTIVES

This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the level of clinical reasoning in intermediate nursing students in different education years. Furthermore, we explored whether the level of clinical reasoning can be explained by years of education and numbers of internship days in different healthcare settings.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

All second, third and fourth year (n = 151) nursing students of one nursing school in the Netherlands were invited to participate in this study. Levels of clinical reasoning were assessed using the Dutch Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (D - LCJR).

METHODS

Twelve experienced nurses assessed the students during two days at the beginning of their education year in an educational simulation setting. Following the assessment protocol, the Rubric was scored in an interview after the students saw their patient.

RESULTS

We assessed 119 students. Fourth-year students scored on a significant higher level of clinical reasoning compared to the second - and third-year students (p < 0.001). Forty five percent of them reached an accomplished level of clinical reasoning. Second- and third-year students scored similar in their level of clinical reasoning (p = 0.61). In addition to education year an internship in the hospital care also explained the variation in level of clinical reasoning. Together they explained 38% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intermediate nursing students were successfully assessed on their level of clinical reasoning in an education environment. The level of clinical reasoning could be explained by education year and number of days internship in the hospital care.

Improving clinical judgment by simulation: a randomized trial and validation of the Lasater clinical judgment rubric in Chinese

BACKGROUND

The development and assessment of clinical judgment ability are essential in nursing education. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) was shown to be valid in evaluating nursing students' learning outcomes and skills in western cultures but has not been validated in mainland China. This study aimed to compare a simulation-teaching model with a traditional teaching method in enhancing the clinical judgment ability of nursing undergraduate students and to validate the Chinese version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (C-LCJR).

METHODS

Four classes of nursing students (n = 157) at Hubei University of Chinese Medicine, China, were randomly assigned to two control and two experimental classes. The experimental classes were taught using simulation teaching with standardized patients, while the control classes were taught using traditional teaching methods. At the end of the experiment, students in both kinds of classes evaluated their clinical judgment using the C-LCJR. Teachers also rated the students but without knowing who had received the simulation teaching. Confirmatory factor analysis and a Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model with Bayesian estimation was fit to the rating data to investigate measurement properties and experimental effects.

RESULTS

Compared to the control classes, students in the experimental classes performed better in all subdomains of C-LCJR (noticing, interpreting, responding, and reflecting). The measurement properties of the C-LCJR were found to be satisfactory with high factor loadings and reliabilities and no bias from age, gender, and raters.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulation teaching model is more effective than the traditional (non-simulation-based) teaching method in improving clinical judgment of Chinese nursing students. The C-LCJR is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring clinical judgment in nursing students in China.

Development and validation of Dutch version of Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in hospital practice: An instrument design study

BACKGROUND

Clinical reasoning in patient care is a skill that cannot be observed directly. So far, no reliable, valid instrument exists for the assessment of nursing students' clinical reasoning skills in hospital practice. Lasater's clinical judgment rubric (LCJR), based on Tanner's model "Thinking like a nurse" has been tested, mainly in academic simulation settings.

OBJECTIVES

The aim is to develop a Dutch version of the LCJR (D-LCJR) and to test its psychometric properties when used in a hospital traineeship context.

DESIGN

A mixed-model approach was used to develop and to validate the instrument.

SETTING

Ten dedicated educational units in a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

A well-mixed group of 52 nursing students, nurse coaches and nurse educators.

METHODS

A Delphi panel developed the D-LCJR. Students' clinical reasoning skills were assessed "live" by nurse coaches, nurse educators and students who rated themselves. The psychometric properties tested during the assessment process are reliability, reproducibility, content validity and construct validity by testing two hypothesis: 1) a positive correlation between assessed and self-reported sum scores (convergent validity) and 2) a linear relation between experience and sum score (clinical validity).

RESULTS

The obtained D-LCJR was found to be internally consistent, Cronbach's alpha 0.93. The rubric is also reproducible with intraclass correlations between 0.69 and 0.78. Experts judged it to be content valid. The two hypothesis were both tested significant, supporting evidence for construct validity.

CONCLUSION

The translated and modified LCJR, is a promising tool for the evaluation of nursing students' development in clinical reasoning in hospital traineeships, by students, nurse coaches and nurse educators. More evidence on construct validity is necessary, in particular for students at the end of their hospital traineeship. Based on our research, the D-LCJR applied in hospital traineeships is a usable and reliable tool.