Enhancing nursing students' clinical competency using a multi-patient simulation learning model: A randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

For nurses, clinical competency is paramount in ensuring that patients receive safe, high-quality care. Multi-patient simulation (MPS) in nursing education is gaining attention, and evidence shows its suitability for real-life situations. MPS can be an effective solution for nurses' continuing clinical education.

OBJECTIVES

This project compares the effectiveness of MPS (involving both a standardized patient and a high fidelity simulator) and a single high-fidelity simulation (single HFS; only involving a high fidelity simulator) for enhancing the clinical competency of nursing students.

DESIGN

A stratified, permuted, block randomized controlled study design was used.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Sixty undergraduate nursing students in years 3, 4, and 5 were selected to participate. Subgroups with each comprising three undergraduate nursing students from different years were formed.

METHODS

The participants were randomized to receive either an MPS (intervention group) or single HFS (control group) for 1 day; they later received the same intervention after a 30-day washout period. One objectively measured questionnaire and two self-reported questionnaires were used to measure clinical competency: the Creighton Competency Evaluation Instrument (CCEI), Clinical Competence Questionnaire (CCQ), and Simulation Effectiveness Tool - Modified Questionnaire (SET-M).

RESULTS

The results revealed significant between-group differences. Specifically, the intervention group showed greater improvement than the control group in both the CCQ (linear contrast [d] = 71.4; 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 53.407, 89.393; P < 0.001) and CCEI total scores (d = 7.17; 95 % CI = 5.837, 8.503; P < 0.001). The SET-M results indicated that 85 % of the participants (n = 51) strongly agreed that they felt more confident about performing a patient handover to the healthcare team after the simulation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings indicated that both the MPS and single HFS effectively enhanced students' clinical competency. However, MPSs have superior educational outcomes relative to traditional single HFSs.

A National Report on Clinical Judgment Model Use in Prelicensure Nursing Curricula

AIM

This study examined US prelicensure nursing program use of clinical judgment models and teaching strategies to promote students' clinical judgment.

BACKGROUND

Growing interest in teaching clinical judgment associated with upcoming changes in NCLEX-RN testing warrants exploration of how models and teaching strategies are currently used.

METHOD

A cross-sectional survey with multiple-choice and open-ended response items was used to examine programs' use of clinical judgment educational models.

RESULTS

Of 234 participants (9 percent response rate), 27 percent reported using a model; 51 percent intended and 20 percent did not intend to start using a model. Tanner's clinical judgment model was the most used, followed by the clinical reasoning cycle. Models were used to inform design of teaching/learning strategies and facilitate clinical teaching and evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Clinical judgment model use may increase as programs prepare for changes in NCLEX-RN. Research is needed to understand how model use contributes to measurable differences in clinical judgment skill.

Which Patient Do I Attend to First? Night-float Simulation to Assess Surgical Intern's Clinical Prioritization Skills

OBJECTIVE

Night-float rotations require general surgery interns to prioritize multiple competing patients' needs efficiently and accurately. Research is lacking on whether these skills can be taught and to what degree the prioritizations taught match overall attending surgeon expectations.

DESIGN

A night-float situation was developed to simulate the experience of surgical interns responding to multiple patients' needs. Participants were instructed to rank order 10 patient paper-case scenarios with a variety of clinical urgencies. After completing their first ranking, the interns participated in a faculty-facilitated peer discussion (intervention) and were then instructed to re-rank their priorities. Their performance was compared pre- and post-intervention, and to the ranking of 16 surgery faculty attendings.

SETTING

Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Surgery, Boston, MA.

PARTICIPANTS

Post-graduate year (PGY) 1 surgical residents.

RESULTS

Two classes of general surgery interns (n = 25) completed the prioritization training simulation in the middle of their internship year, one class in 2018 and one in 2020. Agreement between interns regarding patient prioritization ranking increased after the facilitated peer discussion (pre-intervention mean standard deviation = 1.8 versus 0.9 post-intervention; p = 0.03). In the post-intervention mean rank, four cases moved by one position (p < 0.05). The facilitated discussion resulted in increased absolute agreement between individual interns and attendings' ranks (mean agreement 38 ± 17% pre-intervention Vesus mean 50 ± 20% post-intervention, p = 0.02). The scenarios with highest agreement between interns and attendings concerned patients with the most urgent conditions. Scenarios with the lowest agreement were those ranked with medium-to-low urgency.

CONCLUSION

A faculty-led facilitated discussion appears to increase clinical prioritization consistency among surgical interns and better align their prioritizations with expectations of local attending surgeons.