Comparing the impact of different transfusion medicine teaching methods—A mobile application versus task-based learning—On two dimensions of clinical competence among nursing students: A quasi-experimental study

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Atefeh Falakdami , Zahra Taheri-Ezbarami , Saman Maroufizadeh , Ali Razaghpoor , Hamid Khordadi-Astaneh , Fateme Jafaraghaee
{"title":"Comparing the impact of different transfusion medicine teaching methods—A mobile application versus task-based learning—On two dimensions of clinical competence among nursing students: A quasi-experimental study","authors":"Atefeh Falakdami ,&nbsp;Zahra Taheri-Ezbarami ,&nbsp;Saman Maroufizadeh ,&nbsp;Ali Razaghpoor ,&nbsp;Hamid Khordadi-Astaneh ,&nbsp;Fateme Jafaraghaee","doi":"10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To evaluate and compare the impact of a transfusion medicine training course delivered via two different teaching methods—a mobile application and task-based learning—on nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skill.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>To advance nursing education and clinical competence, it is crucial to integrate innovative methods, such as mobile applications and task-based learning, that promote active and competency-based learning. Evaluating these methods provides educators with insights to enhance nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skill, ultimately improving patient care and supporting professional development.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A quasi-experimental study using a pretest-intervention-posttest design with a control group.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This study included 82 nursing students from the 6th to 8th semesters, selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to three groups—mobile application (n=30), task-based learning (n=30) and control (n=30). The first group received educational content through a mobile application, the second group through task-based learning and the control group received no intervention. Data were collected using a valid and reliable three-part researcher-made tool, including a demographic/educational checklist and questionnaires on knowledge and clinical decision-making skill, administered before and two weeks after the intervention. Analysis was done using paired t-test, analysis of covariance and Bonferroni post hoc test, with a significance level set at p&lt;0.05.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Following the intervention, both intervention groups showed a significant increase in knowledge and clinical decision-making skill scores (p&lt;0.05). Although both groups had higher knowledge scores than the control group, the differences were not significant (p&gt;0.05). In contrast, clinical decision-making scores were significantly higher in both intervention groups compared with the control (p&lt;0.05). No significant differences were observed between the intervention groups regarding the mean post-test knowledge and clinical decision-making skill scores (p&gt;0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both teaching methods effectively improved nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skills in transfusion medicine. To leverage these findings effectively, educational authorities should integrate mobile applications and task-based learning into nursing curricula, test these methods in various settings to assess their impact and use the findings to update curricula in line with current educational needs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48715,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education in Practice","volume":"81 ","pages":"Article 104154"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147159532400283X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

To evaluate and compare the impact of a transfusion medicine training course delivered via two different teaching methods—a mobile application and task-based learning—on nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skill.

Background

To advance nursing education and clinical competence, it is crucial to integrate innovative methods, such as mobile applications and task-based learning, that promote active and competency-based learning. Evaluating these methods provides educators with insights to enhance nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skill, ultimately improving patient care and supporting professional development.

Design

A quasi-experimental study using a pretest-intervention-posttest design with a control group.

Methods

This study included 82 nursing students from the 6th to 8th semesters, selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to three groups—mobile application (n=30), task-based learning (n=30) and control (n=30). The first group received educational content through a mobile application, the second group through task-based learning and the control group received no intervention. Data were collected using a valid and reliable three-part researcher-made tool, including a demographic/educational checklist and questionnaires on knowledge and clinical decision-making skill, administered before and two weeks after the intervention. Analysis was done using paired t-test, analysis of covariance and Bonferroni post hoc test, with a significance level set at p<0.05.

Results

Following the intervention, both intervention groups showed a significant increase in knowledge and clinical decision-making skill scores (p<0.05). Although both groups had higher knowledge scores than the control group, the differences were not significant (p>0.05). In contrast, clinical decision-making scores were significantly higher in both intervention groups compared with the control (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed between the intervention groups regarding the mean post-test knowledge and clinical decision-making skill scores (p>0.05).

Conclusion

Both teaching methods effectively improved nursing students' knowledge and clinical decision-making skills in transfusion medicine. To leverage these findings effectively, educational authorities should integrate mobile applications and task-based learning into nursing curricula, test these methods in various settings to assess their impact and use the findings to update curricula in line with current educational needs.
比较不同输血医学教学方法--移动应用与任务型学习--对护理专业学生临床能力两个维度的影响:准实验研究。
目的:评估和比较通过两种不同教学方法(移动应用和任务型学习)开展的输血医学培训课程对护生知识和临床决策技能的影响:背景:为提高护理教育和临床能力,整合创新方法至关重要,如移动应用程序和任务型学习,以促进主动和基于能力的学习。对这些方法进行评估可为教育者提供洞察力,以提高护理专业学生的知识水平和临床决策技能,最终改善患者护理并支持专业发展:设计:准实验研究,采用前测-干预-后测设计,并设对照组:这项研究包括 82 名来自第 6 至第 8 学期的护理专业学生,他们都是通过方便抽样选出的,并被随机分配到三个小组--移动应用组(30 人)、任务型学习组(30 人)和对照组(30 人)。第一组通过移动应用程序接受教育内容,第二组通过任务型学习接受教育内容,对照组不接受任何干预。数据收集采用了研究人员自制的有效可靠的三部分工具,包括人口统计学/教育核对表以及知识和临床决策技能问卷,分别在干预前和干预后两周进行。分析采用配对 t 检验、协方差分析和 Bonferroni 事后检验,显著性水平设定为 pResults:干预后,两个干预组的知识和临床决策技能得分均有显著提高(p0.05)。相比之下,干预组的临床决策得分明显高于对照组(P0.05):两种教学方法都能有效提高护生的输血医学知识和临床决策技能。为有效利用这些研究结果,教育机构应将移动应用和任务型学习融入护理课程,在不同环境中测试这些方法以评估其影响,并利用研究结果更新课程以满足当前的教育需求。
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
9.40%
发文量
180
审稿时长
51 days
期刊介绍: Nurse Education in Practice enables lecturers and practitioners to both share and disseminate evidence that demonstrates the actual practice of education as it is experienced in the realities of their respective work environments. It is supportive of new authors and will be at the forefront in publishing individual and collaborative papers that demonstrate the link between education and practice.
×
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