The Effect of Case-Based Education on the Development of Nursing Students' Clinical Reasoning Skills

NCT ID: NCT05504824

Last Updated: 2022-08-17

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

22 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-05-18

Study Completion Date

2021-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Aim: This study was conducted to determine the effect of case-based education on the development of clinical reasoning skills of nursing students in critical illnesses.

Methods: The study was conducted between January 20 and June 30, 2021 using a pilot randomized controlled trial design. In the study, 22 volunteer students were assigned to the experimental and control groups by simple randomization. The experimental group was given case-based education to improve their clinical reasoning skills, and the control group continued the standard education process. Data were collected using a Student Information Form, the Clinical Reasoning Case Form (CRCF), the Student Satisfaction with Education Questionnaire, and a Form for Views on the Education. In the evaluation of data, frequency values, Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon tests, Cohen's d coefficient for effect size, ITT analysis, and covariance analysis were used.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Aim of the study This study was conducted to determine the effect of case-based education on the development of nursing students' clinical reasoning skills in critical illnesses.

Research hypotheses H01: There is no difference between the experimental group and the control group in terms of their CRCF scores.

H02: Case-based education on clinical reasoning has no positive effect on student satisfaction.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Clinical Reasoning Critical Illness

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Experimental group

Students in both experimental groups were applied the student information form and the pretest of the CRCF between May 18 and 20, 2021 before the education. The schedule of the education intervention was determined according to the convenience of the students in the experimental group. Accordingly, the experimental group was given education between June 8 and 11, 2021. After the education sessions were completed, experimental groups were applied the CRCF as a posttest on June 28, 2021. The students in the experimental group were asked to fill out the "Student Satisfaction with Education Questionnaire" and the "Form for Views on the Education" online.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Case-based education

Intervention Type OTHER

The education phase This stage included the explanation of the CR process, the analysis of CR cases, the drafting of new cases suitable for the CR process by students, and the analysis process.

The education program was carried out on a web platform (Zoom) consistent with the changes in the COVID-19 pandemic process. The CR cases to be used in case-based education were sent to the students via e-mail before the group interview to make sure students came prepared for the group discussion. In case-based education, after the students read the case, they were asked some questions to determine their decisions and reasoning.

Control group

Students in control groups were applied the student information form and the pretest of the CRCF between May 18 and 20, 2021 before the education. The students in the control group continued their current standard education process. After the education sessions were completed, control groups were applied the CRCF as a posttest on June 28, 2021.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Case-based education

The education phase This stage included the explanation of the CR process, the analysis of CR cases, the drafting of new cases suitable for the CR process by students, and the analysis process.

The education program was carried out on a web platform (Zoom) consistent with the changes in the COVID-19 pandemic process. The CR cases to be used in case-based education were sent to the students via e-mail before the group interview to make sure students came prepared for the group discussion. In case-based education, after the students read the case, they were asked some questions to determine their decisions and reasoning.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Having completed the "Medical Nursing" and Surgical Nursing" courses,
* Volunteering to participate in the study,
* Participate in "Case-Based Education"

Exclusion Criteria

* Not being willing to participate in the study,
* Abandoning the "Case-Based Education" practice
* Not taking one or two of the "Medical Nursing" and "Surgical Nursing" courses at all, or to have taken them but unsuccessfully
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Ankara University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Ayşegül Öztürk Birge

Assistant Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Ankara University Faculty of Nursing

Ankara, , Turkey (Türkiye)

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Turkey (Türkiye)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33156141/

Altman, M. R., Kantrowitz-Gordon, I., Moise, E., Malcolm, K., Vidakovic, M., Barrington, W., ... \& de Castro, A. B. (2021). Addressing Positionality Within Case-Based Learning to Mitigate Systemic Racism in Health Care. Nurse Educator, 46(5), 284-289.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17869587/

Banning, M. (2008). Clinical reasoning and its application to nursing: Concepts and research studies. Nurse education in practice, 8(3), 177-183.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34246202/

Dekhtyar, M., Park, Y. S., Kalinyak, J., Chudgar, S. M., Fedoriw, K. B., Johnson, K. J., ... \& Stern, S. (2022). Use of a structured approach and virtual simulation practice to improve diagnostic reasoning. Diagnosis, 9(1), 69-76.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34218071/

de Sá Tinôco, J. D., Cossi, M. S., \& de Carvalho Lira, A. L. B. (2021). Effect of educational intervention on clinical reasoning skills in nursing: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educat

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12450471/

Groves, M., Scott, I., \& Alexander, H. (2002). Assessing clinical reasoning: a method to monitor its development in a PBL curriculum. Medical teacher, 24(5), 507-515.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19555954/

Hoffman, K. A., Aitken, L. M., \& Duffield, C. (2009). A comparison of novice and expert nurses' cue collection during clinical decision-making: Verbal protocol analysis. International journal of nursing studies, 46(10), 1335-1344.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34202159/

Hong, S., Lee, J., Jang, Y., \& Lee, Y. (2021). A Cross-Sectional Study: What Contributes to Nursing Students' Clinical Reasoning Competence?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(13), 6833.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16497427/

Jacques, T., Harrison, G. A., McLaws, M. L., \& Kilborn, G. (2006). Signs of critical conditions and emergency responses (SOCCER): a model for predicting adverse events in the inpatient setting. Resuscitation, 69(2), 175-183.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34359065/

Lee, K. C., \& Wessol, J. L. (2022). Clinical Reasoning, Judgment, and Safe Medication Administration Practices in Senior Nursing Students. Nurse Educator, 47(1), 51-55.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33157365/

Leijser, J., \& Spek, B. (2021). Level of clinical reasoning in intermediate nursing students explained by education year and days of internships per healthcare branches: A cross-sectional study. Nurse Education Today, 96, 104641.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19948370/

Levett-Jones, T.,... \& Hickey, N. (2010). The 'five rights' of clinical reasoning: An educational model to enhance nursing students' ability to identify and manage clinically 'at risk'p

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35287002/

Ma, C., \& Zhou, W. (2022). Effects of unfolding case-based learning on academic achievement, critical thinking, and self-confidence in undergraduate nursing students learning health assessment skills. Nurse Education in Practice, 103321.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28926146/

Rohde, E., \& Domm, E. (2018). Nurses' clinical reasoning practices that support safe medication administration: An integrative review of the literature. Journal of clinical nursing, 27(3-4), e402-e411.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30394999/

Tedesco-Schneck, M. (2019). Use of script concordance activity with the think-aloud approach to foster clinical reasoning in nursing students. Nurse educator, 44(5), 275-277.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32992269/

Wong, S. H. V., \& Kowitlawakul, Y. (2020). Exploring perceptions and barriers in developing critical thinking and clinical reasoning of nursing students: A qualitative study. Nurse Education Today, 95, 104600.

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

AU-OBIRGE-001

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

7E Model in Nursing Education
NCT06689306 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA