同伴学习:提高动脉血气判读能力的有效教学方法

Q2 Nursing
Riana Mauliandari, M. Sumarwati, Arif Setyo Upoyo
{"title":"同伴学习:提高动脉血气判读能力的有效教学方法","authors":"Riana Mauliandari, M. Sumarwati, Arif Setyo Upoyo","doi":"10.14710/NMJN.V10I3.28660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : Competent nurses are expected to be able to interpret arterial blood gases (ABGs). The benefits of peer learning, an innovative teaching-learning method today, have long been recognized. However, to date, no studies have compared the effect of this method and the traditional classical method in interpreting ABGs.  Purpose : This study aimed to compare the effect of peer learning and classical learning methods on the nurses’ ability to interpret ABGs.  Method : This was a quasi-experimental research with pre and post-test design. Forty ward nurses were invited in the peer learning method group, and another 40 ward nurses were invited in the classical learning method group through a randomization process. Data were collected using a questionnaire before and after the educational intervention. The classical class was taught by an experienced trainer, while peer groups, divided into groups of 5-6, were taught by one member of each group who obtained the best pre-test score and received special training first. The analysis of data was performed by t-test. Result : The result showed that after the intervention, the mean score of interpreting ABGs in the peer learning group increased by 3.18±1.12 ( p <0.001), while in the classical learning method, it only increased by 2.32±0.988 ( p <0.001). Although there were significant increases in ABGs analysis’s ability in both groups, the peer teaching-learning group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in interpreting ABGs ( p <0.001). Conclusion : The peer learning method facilitates a more significant improvement in the nurses’ ability for ABGs interpretation. Peer learning is appropriate as one of the methods in clinical education for nurses.","PeriodicalId":36409,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing","volume":"175 1","pages":"329-338"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peer Learning: An Effective Teaching-Learning Method for Improving Ability in Arterial Blood Gases Interpretation\",\"authors\":\"Riana Mauliandari, M. Sumarwati, Arif Setyo Upoyo\",\"doi\":\"10.14710/NMJN.V10I3.28660\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background : Competent nurses are expected to be able to interpret arterial blood gases (ABGs). The benefits of peer learning, an innovative teaching-learning method today, have long been recognized. However, to date, no studies have compared the effect of this method and the traditional classical method in interpreting ABGs.  Purpose : This study aimed to compare the effect of peer learning and classical learning methods on the nurses’ ability to interpret ABGs.  Method : This was a quasi-experimental research with pre and post-test design. Forty ward nurses were invited in the peer learning method group, and another 40 ward nurses were invited in the classical learning method group through a randomization process. Data were collected using a questionnaire before and after the educational intervention. The classical class was taught by an experienced trainer, while peer groups, divided into groups of 5-6, were taught by one member of each group who obtained the best pre-test score and received special training first. The analysis of data was performed by t-test. Result : The result showed that after the intervention, the mean score of interpreting ABGs in the peer learning group increased by 3.18±1.12 ( p <0.001), while in the classical learning method, it only increased by 2.32±0.988 ( p <0.001). Although there were significant increases in ABGs analysis’s ability in both groups, the peer teaching-learning group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in interpreting ABGs ( p <0.001). Conclusion : The peer learning method facilitates a more significant improvement in the nurses’ ability for ABGs interpretation. Peer learning is appropriate as one of the methods in clinical education for nurses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing\",\"volume\":\"175 1\",\"pages\":\"329-338\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14710/NMJN.V10I3.28660\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14710/NMJN.V10I3.28660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:称职的护士被期望能够解释动脉血气(ABGs)。同侪学习作为当今一种创新的教学方法,其好处早已被人们所认识。然而,迄今为止,还没有研究将这种方法与传统的经典方法在解释ABGs方面的效果进行比较。目的:本研究旨在比较同伴学习与经典学习方法对护士解读ABGs能力的影响。方法:采用准实验研究,采用前后试验设计。采用同伴学习法组共40名病区护士,采用经典学习法组共40名病区护士。在教育干预前后通过问卷调查收集数据。经典班由经验丰富的培训师授课,同侪组分为5-6组,每组由考前成绩最好的1人授课,先接受特殊培训。数据分析采用t检验。结果:结果显示,干预后同伴学习组的翻译ABGs平均得分提高了3.18±1.12分(p <0.001),而经典学习组仅提高了2.32±0.988分(p <0.001)。虽然两组的ABGs分析能力都有显著提高,但同侪教学组在解释ABGs方面表现出更大的显著改善(p <0.001)。结论:同伴学习法有助于护士对血象的解释能力有更显著的提高。同伴学习作为护士临床教育的一种方法是合适的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peer Learning: An Effective Teaching-Learning Method for Improving Ability in Arterial Blood Gases Interpretation
Background : Competent nurses are expected to be able to interpret arterial blood gases (ABGs). The benefits of peer learning, an innovative teaching-learning method today, have long been recognized. However, to date, no studies have compared the effect of this method and the traditional classical method in interpreting ABGs.  Purpose : This study aimed to compare the effect of peer learning and classical learning methods on the nurses’ ability to interpret ABGs.  Method : This was a quasi-experimental research with pre and post-test design. Forty ward nurses were invited in the peer learning method group, and another 40 ward nurses were invited in the classical learning method group through a randomization process. Data were collected using a questionnaire before and after the educational intervention. The classical class was taught by an experienced trainer, while peer groups, divided into groups of 5-6, were taught by one member of each group who obtained the best pre-test score and received special training first. The analysis of data was performed by t-test. Result : The result showed that after the intervention, the mean score of interpreting ABGs in the peer learning group increased by 3.18±1.12 ( p <0.001), while in the classical learning method, it only increased by 2.32±0.988 ( p <0.001). Although there were significant increases in ABGs analysis’s ability in both groups, the peer teaching-learning group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in interpreting ABGs ( p <0.001). Conclusion : The peer learning method facilitates a more significant improvement in the nurses’ ability for ABGs interpretation. Peer learning is appropriate as one of the methods in clinical education for nurses.
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
Nurse Media Journal of Nursing
Nurse Media Journal of Nursing Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信