基于临床判断模型的新毕业护士批判性反思项目:一项非随机对照试验。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Ae Ran Kim, Jeong Hee Hong, Kyeongsug Kim, Yuna Kim, Jung Min Lee, Heejin Lee, Ji Hyun Yoon, Mi Soon Kim
{"title":"基于临床判断模型的新毕业护士批判性反思项目:一项非随机对照试验。","authors":"Ae Ran Kim, Jeong Hee Hong, Kyeongsug Kim, Yuna Kim, Jung Min Lee, Heejin Lee, Ji Hyun Yoon, Mi Soon Kim","doi":"10.1002/nur.22444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the effects of a critical reflection program utilizing the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) reflective questions based on the Clinical Judgment Model (CJM) on newly graduated nurses' clinical judgment skills. A total of 153 newly graduated nurses scheduled for on-site training in a ward nursing unit were divided into a control group (receiving only the usual on-site training with preceptorship) and an experimental group (receiving the developed program with the same on-site training with preceptorship as the control group). Data were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months after the intervention. A comparison of the scores of the two groups at each measurement time point revealed that the experimental group showed significantly higher scores than the control group in clinical judgment (z = 3.25, p = 0.003) and stage of noticing (z = 2.78, p = 0.015) at 6 weeks postintervention. Clinical reasoning competence (experimental χ<sup>2</sup> = 24.57, p < 0.001; control χ<sup>2</sup> = 41.12, p < 0.001) and clinical judgment (experimental χ<sup>2</sup> = 12.74, p = 0.002; control χ<sup>2</sup> = 10.54, p = 0.005) significantly improved scores across the three time points in both groups. The change in scores in the responding stage of clinical judgment from preintervention to 6 weeks postintervention showed a significant difference between the two groups (z = -2.44, p = 0.045). A critical reflection program based on the CJM can help newly graduated nurses enhance their clinical judgment over a short period during the early stages of clinical adaptation.</p>","PeriodicalId":54492,"journal":{"name":"Research in Nursing & Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Judgment Model-Based Critical Reflection Program for Newly Graduated Nurses: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ae Ran Kim, Jeong Hee Hong, Kyeongsug Kim, Yuna Kim, Jung Min Lee, Heejin Lee, Ji Hyun Yoon, Mi Soon Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/nur.22444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study evaluated the effects of a critical reflection program utilizing the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) reflective questions based on the Clinical Judgment Model (CJM) on newly graduated nurses' clinical judgment skills. A total of 153 newly graduated nurses scheduled for on-site training in a ward nursing unit were divided into a control group (receiving only the usual on-site training with preceptorship) and an experimental group (receiving the developed program with the same on-site training with preceptorship as the control group). Data were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months after the intervention. A comparison of the scores of the two groups at each measurement time point revealed that the experimental group showed significantly higher scores than the control group in clinical judgment (z = 3.25, p = 0.003) and stage of noticing (z = 2.78, p = 0.015) at 6 weeks postintervention. Clinical reasoning competence (experimental χ<sup>2</sup> = 24.57, p < 0.001; control χ<sup>2</sup> = 41.12, p < 0.001) and clinical judgment (experimental χ<sup>2</sup> = 12.74, p = 0.002; control χ<sup>2</sup> = 10.54, p = 0.005) significantly improved scores across the three time points in both groups. The change in scores in the responding stage of clinical judgment from preintervention to 6 weeks postintervention showed a significant difference between the two groups (z = -2.44, p = 0.045). A critical reflection program based on the CJM can help newly graduated nurses enhance their clinical judgment over a short period during the early stages of clinical adaptation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Nursing & Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Nursing & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22444\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Nursing & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22444","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

摘要

本研究评估了基于临床判断模型(CJM)的Lasater临床判断准则(LCJR)反思性问题的批判性反思项目对新毕业护士临床判断技能的影响。选取某病区护理单元153名刚毕业的护士进行现场培训,分为对照组(仅接受常规的现场培训,并有指导员指导)和实验组(接受与对照组相同的现场培训,并有指导员指导)。在干预后的基线、6周和3个月收集数据。比较两组在各测量时间点的得分,实验组在干预后6周的临床判断(z = 3.25, p = 0.003)和注意阶段(z = 2.78, p = 0.015)得分显著高于对照组。临床推理能力(实验χ2 = 24.57, p 2 = 41.12, p 2 = 12.74, p = 0.002;对照组χ2 = 10.54, p = 0.005),两组患者在三个时间点的得分均显著提高。两组患者干预前至干预后6周临床判断反应期得分变化差异有统计学意义(z = -2.44, p = 0.045)。一个基于CJM的批判性反思项目可以帮助刚毕业的护士在临床适应的早期阶段在短时间内提高临床判断能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Judgment Model-Based Critical Reflection Program for Newly Graduated Nurses: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

This study evaluated the effects of a critical reflection program utilizing the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) reflective questions based on the Clinical Judgment Model (CJM) on newly graduated nurses' clinical judgment skills. A total of 153 newly graduated nurses scheduled for on-site training in a ward nursing unit were divided into a control group (receiving only the usual on-site training with preceptorship) and an experimental group (receiving the developed program with the same on-site training with preceptorship as the control group). Data were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months after the intervention. A comparison of the scores of the two groups at each measurement time point revealed that the experimental group showed significantly higher scores than the control group in clinical judgment (z = 3.25, p = 0.003) and stage of noticing (z = 2.78, p = 0.015) at 6 weeks postintervention. Clinical reasoning competence (experimental χ2 = 24.57, p < 0.001; control χ2 = 41.12, p < 0.001) and clinical judgment (experimental χ2 = 12.74, p = 0.002; control χ2 = 10.54, p = 0.005) significantly improved scores across the three time points in both groups. The change in scores in the responding stage of clinical judgment from preintervention to 6 weeks postintervention showed a significant difference between the two groups (z = -2.44, p = 0.045). A critical reflection program based on the CJM can help newly graduated nurses enhance their clinical judgment over a short period during the early stages of clinical adaptation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Research in Nursing & Health ( RINAH ) is a peer-reviewed general research journal devoted to publication of a wide range of research that will inform the practice of nursing and other health disciplines. The editors invite reports of research describing problems and testing interventions related to health phenomena, health care and self-care, clinical organization and administration; and the testing of research findings in practice. Research protocols are considered if funded in a peer-reviewed process by an agency external to the authors’ home institution and if the work is in progress. Papers on research methods and techniques are appropriate if they go beyond what is already generally available in the literature and include description of successful use of the method. Theory papers are accepted if each proposition is supported by research evidence. Systematic reviews of the literature are reviewed if PRISMA guidelines are followed. Letters to the editor commenting on published articles are welcome.
×
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