Diabetes Education Program for Nursing Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Nursing Open Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1002/nop2.70105
Jeong-Ah Ahn, Eun-Mi Kim, Jung Eun Lee, Kyoung-A Kim
{"title":"Diabetes Education Program for Nursing Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Jeong-Ah Ahn, Eun-Mi Kim, Jung Eun Lee, Kyoung-A Kim","doi":"10.1002/nop2.70105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The purpose of this study was to summarise the current state of the science on diabetes mellitus education programs for nursing students.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies, published in English between 2013 and 2022, that examined diabetes education programs for nursing students were considered in the review. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Checklist. Key information such as authors, study focus, population, sample size, details of intervention and control group treatments, outcome variables, and main findings were extracted and summarised in a data extraction form for further analyses and syntheses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature search identified 464 articles, from which 13 studies were evaluated in the systematic review. Most studies (n = 12, 92.3%) used technology-based teaching methods, such as high-fidelity simulations, mobile applications, and virtual reality simulations. Regarding the evaluation of diabetes education program effectiveness, the majority of studies showed significant improvements in knowledge (n = 8, 61.5%), followed by satisfaction with learning (n = 4, 30.8%), nursing skill performance (n = 3, 23.1%), and self-confidence (n = 3, 23.1%) in nursing students. In meta-analyses, technology-based teaching interventions, compared to traditional education, showed no statistically significant improvement in diabetes knowledge (standard mean difference 9.52, 95% CI [-0.18, 19.21], p = 0.05) and self-efficacy (standard mean difference 24.09, 95% CI [-10.75, 58.92], p = 0.18). Despite this, technology-based methods demonstrated favourable effects on knowledge and self-efficacy against traditional education. Findings highlight the importance of emerging technology-based diabetes education programs tailored for nursing students, crucial for enhancing positive educational outcomes. No Patient or Public Contribution.</p>","PeriodicalId":48570,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Open","volume":"11 12","pages":"e70105"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11605939/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.70105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this study was to summarise the current state of the science on diabetes mellitus education programs for nursing students.

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies, published in English between 2013 and 2022, that examined diabetes education programs for nursing students were considered in the review. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Checklist. Key information such as authors, study focus, population, sample size, details of intervention and control group treatments, outcome variables, and main findings were extracted and summarised in a data extraction form for further analyses and syntheses.

Results: The literature search identified 464 articles, from which 13 studies were evaluated in the systematic review. Most studies (n = 12, 92.3%) used technology-based teaching methods, such as high-fidelity simulations, mobile applications, and virtual reality simulations. Regarding the evaluation of diabetes education program effectiveness, the majority of studies showed significant improvements in knowledge (n = 8, 61.5%), followed by satisfaction with learning (n = 4, 30.8%), nursing skill performance (n = 3, 23.1%), and self-confidence (n = 3, 23.1%) in nursing students. In meta-analyses, technology-based teaching interventions, compared to traditional education, showed no statistically significant improvement in diabetes knowledge (standard mean difference 9.52, 95% CI [-0.18, 19.21], p = 0.05) and self-efficacy (standard mean difference 24.09, 95% CI [-10.75, 58.92], p = 0.18). Despite this, technology-based methods demonstrated favourable effects on knowledge and self-efficacy against traditional education. Findings highlight the importance of emerging technology-based diabetes education programs tailored for nursing students, crucial for enhancing positive educational outcomes. No Patient or Public Contribution.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nursing Open
Nursing Open Nursing-General Nursing
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
298
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Open is a peer reviewed open access journal that welcomes articles on all aspects of nursing and midwifery practice, research, education and policy. We aim to publish articles that contribute to the art and science of nursing and which have a positive impact on health either locally, nationally, regionally or globally
×
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