A86 Investigating the Effect of Exposure to Asynchronous Virtual Clinical Environments on Nursing Students’ Actual/Perceived Competence in Medication Dosage Calculation: A Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Medication administration is a high-risk clinical task, with errors contributing to preventable harm worldwide [1]. Competence in medicine calculation is essential to patient safety, yet nursing students often report anxiety and low confidence, increasing the risk of errors. Virtual learning environments provide valuable opportunities to develop students’ skills, build confidence, and enhance competency in medication administration. Methods: This pilot study investigated the relationship between exposure duration to asynchronous virtual medication dosage calculation scenarios and nursing student actual and perceived competence, using a randomised quasi-experimental research design (pre- and post-test). Ethical approval was gained at each site before second/third-year pre-registration undergraduate nursing students were recruited from six sites in the UK and Canada in 2023 using purposive sampling. Participating students completed an orientation to the safeMedicate® Authentic Virtual Drug Dosage Calculation Clinical Learning Environment (VLE), and safeMedicate® 25-item Healthcare Numeracy Assessment (HNA) before being allocated to one of four groups with different exposure times to a safeMedicate® COVID-19 education module. Results: Actual and perceived competence assessment outcomes for all students (n=38) across the four groups were analysed and compared before and after variable exposure to the intervention using descriptive and inferential statistical analyses. Results showed that groups were homogeneous at baseline, i.e. no differences in the mean pre-test assessment results. Post-test assessment results showed that mean actual competence scores increased from 77 pre-test to 92 post-test, with perceived competence scores mirroring these results for all groups, including the control group which did not have intervention exposure. There was no evidence of significant outcome differences between groups with varied exposure duration, suggesting that increased exposure time did not translate into enhanced competence improvement. Rather, results indicated that exposure to the VLE and initial baseline and HNA assessments with outcome feedback had the greatest influence on the improvements found, and the psychological and confidence-building value of this VLE. This is consistent with previous research on self-efficacy enhancement effects of digital learning [2,3]. Discussion: The lack of significant differences between groups with varying exposure durations found in this pilot study contradicts earlier studies advocating for prolonged engagement with VLEs to achieve competence [4]. Instead, the findings suggest that the increase in actual and perceived competency scores occurred because feedback on performance was also provided to students after each VLE assessment they completed. This may indicate that simulation-based intervention effectiveness is based on instructional design rather than on exposure time. However, because a key limitation of this pilot study is its small sample size, further research on a larger scale building on this pilot study is needed to explore and understand the impact of instructional design, feedback, and interaction on learning outcomes and the psychological and confidence-building value of this intervention and VLE. Ethics Statement: As the submitting author, I can confirm that all relevant ethical standards of research and dissemination have been met. Additionally, I can confirm that the necessary ethical approval has been obtained, where applicable References 1. World Health Organization. Global burden of preventable medication-related harm in health care: A systematic review. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023. Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/376203/9789240088887-eng.pdf?sequence=1. 2. Goldsworthy S, Muir N, Baron S, et al. The impact of virtual simulation on the recognition and response to the rapidly deteriorating patient among undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today. 2022;110. 3. Heyn LG, Brembo EA, Byermoen KR, et al. Exploring facilitation in virtual simulation in nursing education: a scoping review. PEC Innovation. 2023;3. 4. Sato SN, Moreno EC, Rubio-Zarapuz A, et al. Navigating the new normal: adapting online and distance learning in the post-pandemic era. Education Sciences. 2024;14(1):1–25. Acknowledgements/Funding Declaration: The authors acknowledge the Canadian Association of Schools for Nursing (CASN) for the Pat Griffin Grant. Special thanks to Fiona Budden, Ryan Muldoon and Jan Hutt from Bournemouth University. Supporting Documents – Figure 1-A86
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».