Nursing students' evaluation of clinical learning environment and supervision models before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative study.

Paola Ferri, Serena Stifani, Elena Morotti, Sara Alberti, Valeria Vannini, Rosaria Di Lorenzo, Sergio Rovesti, Alvisa Palese
{"title":"Nursing students' evaluation of clinical learning environment and supervision models before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative study.","authors":"Paola Ferri, Serena Stifani, Elena Morotti, Sara Alberti, Valeria Vannini, Rosaria Di Lorenzo, Sergio Rovesti, Alvisa Palese","doi":"10.23750/abm.v94i6.14750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic has required a rapid reorganization of clinical training and supervision models for nursing education. The aim of this study was to compare students' levels of perception of the quality of the Clinical Learning Environment (CLE) using two different clinical supervision models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparative design was implemented. A convenience sample of second and third-year undergraduate nursing students (n=127) in clinical training in the 2018/2019 Academic Year (AY) received the usual nursing staff supervision model, while during the COVID-19 pandemic in the following year, they (n=69) received an individualized supervision model. Data were collected using three instruments: the Clinical Learning Environmental Quality Evaluation Index (CLEQI); the Clinical Learning Environment, Supervision and Nurse Teacher Scale (CLES+T); and a socio-demographic tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean total scores of both scales had increased in the second survey (CLEQI: M=57.88±11.8 vs. M=60.88±9.3, p=0.035; CLES+T: M=148.4±23.3 vs. M=154.5±21.9, p=0.037). The nursing students reported high levels of CLE quality with both supervision models, even though the individualized supervision model was rated significantly higher by the students than the staff supervision model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Students supported by a personal supervisor during clinical training had a more positive experience and rated the quality of the tutorial strategies, learning opportunities, safety and nursing care, leadership style of the ward manager and overall CLE more highly.</p>","PeriodicalId":93849,"journal":{"name":"Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis","volume":"94 6","pages":"e2023256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10734234/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v94i6.14750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim: The COVID-19 pandemic has required a rapid reorganization of clinical training and supervision models for nursing education. The aim of this study was to compare students' levels of perception of the quality of the Clinical Learning Environment (CLE) using two different clinical supervision models.

Methods: A comparative design was implemented. A convenience sample of second and third-year undergraduate nursing students (n=127) in clinical training in the 2018/2019 Academic Year (AY) received the usual nursing staff supervision model, while during the COVID-19 pandemic in the following year, they (n=69) received an individualized supervision model. Data were collected using three instruments: the Clinical Learning Environmental Quality Evaluation Index (CLEQI); the Clinical Learning Environment, Supervision and Nurse Teacher Scale (CLES+T); and a socio-demographic tool.

Results: The mean total scores of both scales had increased in the second survey (CLEQI: M=57.88±11.8 vs. M=60.88±9.3, p=0.035; CLES+T: M=148.4±23.3 vs. M=154.5±21.9, p=0.037). The nursing students reported high levels of CLE quality with both supervision models, even though the individualized supervision model was rated significantly higher by the students than the staff supervision model.

Conclusions: Students supported by a personal supervisor during clinical training had a more positive experience and rated the quality of the tutorial strategies, learning opportunities, safety and nursing care, leadership style of the ward manager and overall CLE more highly.

护理专业学生在 COVID-19 大流行之前和期间对临床学习环境和督导模式的评价:一项比较研究。
背景和目的:COVID-19 大流行要求迅速重组护理教育的临床培训和督导模式。本研究旨在比较学生对两种不同临床督导模式下临床学习环境(CLE)质量的感知水平:方法:采用比较设计。在2018/2019学年(AY)的临床培训中,方便抽样的二年级和三年级护理本科生(n=127)接受了通常的护理人员督导模式,而在下一年的COVID-19大流行期间,他们(n=69)接受了个性化督导模式。数据收集使用了三种工具:临床学习环境质量评价指数(CLEQI)、临床学习环境、督导和护师量表(CLES+T)以及社会人口学工具:在第二次调查中,两个量表的平均总分均有所上升(CLEQI:M=57.88±11.8 vs. M=60.88±9.3,p=0.035;CLES+T:M=148.4±23.3 vs. M=154.5±21.9,p=0.037)。护理专业学生对两种督导模式的 CLE 质量都有很高的评价,尽管学生对个性化督导模式的评价明显高于员工督导模式:结论:在临床培训期间,由个人督导支持的学生有更积极的体验,他们对辅导策略、学习机会、安全和护理质量、病房经理的领导风格和整体 CLE 的评价更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信