Refining clinical judgment competence in nursing education in the Philippines: A mixed-methods study on the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique in case-based learning.

IF 1.1 Q3 NURSING Belitung Nursing Journal Pub Date : 2024-11-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.33546/bnj.3560
Rudena A Madayag, Evangeline C Bautista, John Paulo C Pineda, Aylwin S Geanga, Rhocette M Sn Agustin, Myron L Roque, Angela P Apostol, Debbie Q Ramirez
{"title":"Refining clinical judgment competence in nursing education in the Philippines: A mixed-methods study on the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique in case-based learning.","authors":"Rudena A Madayag, Evangeline C Bautista, John Paulo C Pineda, Aylwin S Geanga, Rhocette M Sn Agustin, Myron L Roque, Angela P Apostol, Debbie Q Ramirez","doi":"10.33546/bnj.3560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical judgment is crucial for nurses in complex healthcare settings. In the Philippines, nursing students must develop critical thinking and decision-making skills to handle resource-limited environments and challenging patient care. However, existing educational methods often fail to engage students and fully promote diverse perspectives.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to examine the effect of integrating the Philips 66 technique into Case-Based Learning (CBL) on enhancing clinical judgment competence among Filipino nursing students.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. The quantitative phase involved a true experimental pre-test/post-test design with 60 senior nursing students randomly assigned to intervention (<i>n</i> = 30) and control (<i>n</i> = 30) groups. The intervention group participated in the Philips 66 technique with CBL, while the control group followed standard CBL. Clinical judgment competence was assessed using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) and a researcher-designed/validated questionnaire to measure confidence. Focus group discussions (FGDs) with a subset of the intervention group explored their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests for the quantitative component, while thematic analysis was applied to qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention group significantly outperformed the control group in both self-reported confidence and overall clinical judgment abilities. The Philips 66-CBL group showed significant improvements (<i>p</i> <0.005, <i>r</i> (effect size) = 0.66 - 0.71) in all areas, while the control group demonstrated significant improvements in information seeking, evaluation/self-analysis, and commitment to improvement (<i>p</i> <0.001, Cohen's <i>d</i> = 0.54 - 0.617). Qualitative data from FGDs highlighted the value of Philips 66 in fostering teamwork, rapid knowledge sharing, and increased efficiency in addressing clinical scenarios, which are essential skills for nursing practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The combination of the Philips 66 technique with CBL significantly improves the clinical judgment abilities of Filipino nursing students in a shorter timeframe compared to conventional approaches. Insights from qualitative data highlight its effectiveness in fostering collaborative learning and preparing students for the challenges of dynamic clinical settings. Further research with larger, more diverse samples across different contexts is essential to confirm these findings and explore the long-term influence of Philips 66-CBL on nursing students' clinical judgment development worldwide.</p><p><strong>Trial registry number: </strong>NCT06646068 [clinicaltrias.gov].</p><p><strong>Philippine health research registry: </strong>PHRR241010-007605 [registry.healthresearch.ph].</p>","PeriodicalId":42002,"journal":{"name":"Belitung Nursing Journal","volume":"10 6","pages":"680-694"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11586615/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Belitung Nursing Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33546/bnj.3560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical judgment is crucial for nurses in complex healthcare settings. In the Philippines, nursing students must develop critical thinking and decision-making skills to handle resource-limited environments and challenging patient care. However, existing educational methods often fail to engage students and fully promote diverse perspectives.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the effect of integrating the Philips 66 technique into Case-Based Learning (CBL) on enhancing clinical judgment competence among Filipino nursing students.

Methods: This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. The quantitative phase involved a true experimental pre-test/post-test design with 60 senior nursing students randomly assigned to intervention (n = 30) and control (n = 30) groups. The intervention group participated in the Philips 66 technique with CBL, while the control group followed standard CBL. Clinical judgment competence was assessed using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) and a researcher-designed/validated questionnaire to measure confidence. Focus group discussions (FGDs) with a subset of the intervention group explored their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests for the quantitative component, while thematic analysis was applied to qualitative data.

Results: The intervention group significantly outperformed the control group in both self-reported confidence and overall clinical judgment abilities. The Philips 66-CBL group showed significant improvements (p <0.005, r (effect size) = 0.66 - 0.71) in all areas, while the control group demonstrated significant improvements in information seeking, evaluation/self-analysis, and commitment to improvement (p <0.001, Cohen's d = 0.54 - 0.617). Qualitative data from FGDs highlighted the value of Philips 66 in fostering teamwork, rapid knowledge sharing, and increased efficiency in addressing clinical scenarios, which are essential skills for nursing practice.

Conclusion: The combination of the Philips 66 technique with CBL significantly improves the clinical judgment abilities of Filipino nursing students in a shorter timeframe compared to conventional approaches. Insights from qualitative data highlight its effectiveness in fostering collaborative learning and preparing students for the challenges of dynamic clinical settings. Further research with larger, more diverse samples across different contexts is essential to confirm these findings and explore the long-term influence of Philips 66-CBL on nursing students' clinical judgment development worldwide.

Trial registry number: NCT06646068 [clinicaltrias.gov].

Philippine health research registry: PHRR241010-007605 [registry.healthresearch.ph].

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
菲律宾护理教育中临床判断能力的完善:关于飞利浦 66 头脑风暴技术在案例式学习中的影响的混合方法研究。
背景:在复杂的医疗环境中,临床判断对护士来说至关重要。在菲律宾,护理专业学生必须培养批判性思维和决策技能,以应对资源有限的环境和具有挑战性的病人护理。然而,现有的教育方法往往无法让学生参与其中,也无法充分促进学生的多元化视角:本研究旨在探讨将飞利浦 66 技术融入案例式学习(CBL)对提高菲律宾护理专业学生临床判断能力的影响:本研究采用解释性顺序混合方法设计。定量阶段采用真正的实验前测/后测设计,将 60 名高年级护理学生随机分配到干预组(30 人)和对照组(30 人)。干预组采用飞利浦 66 技术和 CBL,对照组采用标准 CBL。临床判断能力采用拉萨特临床判断评分标准(LCJR)和研究人员设计/验证的问卷进行评估,以衡量学生的自信心。与干预组的一部分人进行了焦点小组讨论(FGD),探讨了他们使用飞利浦 66 技术的经验。定量数据采用描述性统计和非参数检验进行分析,定性数据则采用主题分析:结果:干预组在自我报告的自信心和整体临床判断能力方面均明显优于对照组。飞利浦 66-CBL 组在所有方面都有显著提高(p r(效应大小)= 0.66 - 0.71),而对照组在信息搜寻、评估/自我分析和改进承诺方面都有显著提高(p d = 0.54 - 0.617)。来自 FGD 的定性数据强调了飞利浦 66 在促进团队合作、快速知识共享和提高临床情景处理效率方面的价值,这些都是护理实践中的基本技能:与传统方法相比,飞利浦 66 技术与 CBL 的结合能在更短的时间内显著提高菲律宾护理专业学生的临床判断能力。从定性数据中获得的启示凸显了该方法在促进协作学习和帮助学生应对动态临床环境挑战方面的有效性。为了证实这些发现并探索飞利浦 66-CBL 对全球护理专业学生临床判断能力发展的长期影响,有必要在不同背景下对更大规模、更多样化的样本进行进一步研究:NCT06646068 [clinicaltrias.gov].Philippine health research registry:PHRR241010-007605 [registry.healthresearch.ph].
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
42.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Challenges of health workers in primary health facilities in implementing obstetric emergency referrals to save women from death in Indonesia: A qualitative study. Elements of a nurse-coordinated post-stroke home care rehabilitation in the Philippines: A cross-sectional study. Exploring patients' perspectives on healthcare service quality in outpatient settings at a public hospital in Palembang, Indonesia: A qualitative study. Factors affecting quality of life among older adults with hypertension in Wenzhou, China: A cross-sectional study. Lower accuracy of estimated delivery date using last menstrual period recall and related factors of adverse events during childbirth: A sub-analysis of a birth cohort study in Makassar, Indonesia.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1