Effects of a Colonoscopy based Simulation Education Program on Knowledge and Clinical Performance in Nursing Students

Hyo-Youn Kim; Hae-Ran Kim

doi:10.7469/kjan.2015.27.2.135

Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.27(2) > 1100020

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim and Kim: Effects of a Colonoscopy based Simulation Education Program on Knowledge and Clinical Performance in Nursing Students

Original Article

Korean J Adult Nurs 2015;27(2):135-145.

Published online: NaN April 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7469/kjan.2015.27.2.135

Effects of a Colonoscopy based Simulation Education Program on Knowledge and Clinical Performance in Nursing Students

Hyo-Youn Kim¹, Hae-Ran Kim²

^¹Mokpo Christian Hospital, Mokpo

^²Department of Nursing, HonamUniversity, Gwangju, Korea

Corresponding author: Kim, Hae-Ran Department of Nursing, Honam University, 417 Eodeung-daero, Gwangsan-gu, Gwangju 506-714, Korea. Tel: +82-62-940-5553, Fax: +82-62-940-5068, E-mail: rahn00@hanmail.net

Received 3 February 201513 March 2015 Accepted 18 March 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purposeof thisstudywas toevaluatetheeffectsof acolonoscopysimulationprogramonknowledge and clinical performance amongnursingstudents. Methods: The program consistedof ascenariowith threeob-jectives: health assessment, nursing before/after colonoscopy and emergency care for bleeding following the colonoscopy. Anonequivalent control grouppretest-posttest designwas used. The samplewas 149nursingstu-dents recruited from H University in G city from August, 2013 to December, 2014. The treatment group (n=71) receivedthesimulationandthecomparisongroup(n=78)receivedtheusual lectureprogram. Datawere analyzed using descriptive statistics, x² test, t-test and repeated measure ANOVA using the SPSS/WIN 20.0 program. Result: Participants in the treatment group had significantly increased reported scores on both knowledge and clinical performance. Conclusion: Results indicate that the simulated program is a useful strategy for improving knowledge and clinical performanceamongnursingstudents. The development of simulationpractice programs in a variety of fields are needed in order to promote the practical competence of nursing students.

Keywords: Colonoscopy, Simulation, Nursing

REFERENCES

1.Liaw SY., Chan SW., Chen FG., Hooi SC., Siau C. Comparison of virtual patient simulation with mannequin-based simulation for improving clinical performances in assessing and managing clinical deterioration: randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2014. 16(9):e214. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3322.

2.Jho MY. An analysis of research on nursing practice education in Korea. The Journal of Korean AcademicSociety of Nursing Education. 2010. 16(2):239–48.

3.Kwon YJ., Son SS., Lim YD. The rights ofpatients as consumers. Health Policy and Management. 2012. 22(3):315–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.4332/KJHPA.2012.22.3.315.

4.Song JH., Kim MW. Study on clinical education for nursing in hospitals in Korea. The Journal of Korean Academic Society Of Nursing Education. 2013. 19(2):251–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.5977/jkasne.2013.19.2.251.

5.Sin KM., Kwon JO., Kim EY. Factors associatedwith newgradu-ate nurses'reality shock. The Journal of Korean Nursing Administration Academic Society. 2014. 20(3):293–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2014.20.3.292.

6.Son SS., Yang SJ. Job stress and job satisfaction among nurses in gastrointestinal endoscopy units. Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research. 2014. 20(2):189–99.

7.Lee SJ., Park YM., Noh SM. The effects of simulation training with hybrid model for nursing students on nursing performance ability and self confidence. Korean Journal of Adult Nursing. 2013. 25(1):170–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2013.25.1.170.

8.Park JS. Certification standards for an accreditation of nursing education. Presentation meeting for Nursing Education Accreditation Evaluation in 2012;2012 March 15; Catholic Research Institute of Medical Science Auditorium. Seoul: Korean Accreditation Board of Nursing Education;2012. p. 111–41.

9.Ballangrud R., Persenius M., Hedelin B., Hall-Lord ML. Exploring intensive care nurses' team performance in a simulation-based emergency situation,-expert raters' assessments versus self-assessments: an explorative study. BioMed Central Nursing. 2014. 13(1):47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-014-0047-5.

10.Powell-Laney S., Keen C., Hall K. The use of human patient simulators to enhance clinical decision-making of nursing students. Education for Health. 2012. 25(1):11–5.

11.Meyer MN., Connors H., Hou Q., Gajewski B. The effect of simulation on clinical performance: a junior nursing student clinical comparison study. Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2011. 6(5):269–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e318223a048.

12.Aqel AA., Ahmad MM. High-fidelity simulation effects on CPR knowledge, skills, acquisition, and retention in nursing students. Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing. 2014. 11(6):394–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12063.

13.Arafeh JM. Simulation-based training: the future of competency? Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing. 2011. 25(2):171–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JPN.0b013e3182116e55.

14.National Cancer Information Center. National cancer statistics. [Internet]. Seoul: National Cancer Information Center;2012. [cited 2013 August 10]. Available from:. http://www.cancer.go.kr/mbs/cancer/subview.jsp?id=cancer_040102000000.

15.Anderloni A., Jovani M., Hassan C., Repici A. Advances, problems, and complications of polypectomy. Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology. 2014. 30(7):285–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S43084.

16.Lee SH., Park YK., Lee DJ., Kim KM. Colonoscopy procedural skills and training for new beginners. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2014. 20(45):16984–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i45.16984.

17.Lin OS. Performing colonoscopy in elderly and very elderly patients: risks, costs and benefits. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014. 6(6):220–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v6.i6.220.

18.Lee YJ., Hong EJ., Kim SO., Kim HS., Yang IS., Cha KH, et al. Effects of walking on discomfort and colon cleansing during colon lavage before colonoscopy. Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research. 2010. 16(1):39–49.

19.Trevisani L., Zelante A., Sartori S. Colonoscopy, pain and fears: is it an indissoluble trinomial? World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014. 6(6):227–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v6.i6.227.

20.McIntosh KS., Gregor JC., Khanna NV. Computer-basedvirtual reality colonoscopy simulation improves patient-based colonoscopy performance. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2014. 28(4):203–6.

21.White I., Buchberg B., Tsikitis VL., Herzig DO., Vetto JT., Lu KC. A virtual reality endoscopic simulator augments general surgery resident cancer education as measured by performance improvement. Journal of Cancer Education. 2014. 29(2):333–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13187-014-0610-5.

22.Yoo SY. Development and effects of a simulation-based education program for newborn emergency care. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2013. 43(4):468–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2013.43.4.468.

23.TheKorea Societyof Coloproctology. Colonoscopy. [Internet]. Seoul: The Korea Society of Coloproctology;2013. [cited 2013 August 2]. Available from:. http://www.colon.or.kr/colonlife/story/index.kin?mode=view&uid=62&no=31&page=1&search=&search_text=&subid=1.

24.Han WJ., Kim YJ., Kim JG., Kim TG., Lee SY., Cho MS, et al. Risk factors for delayed bleeding after colonoscopic polypectomy. The Korean Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2010. 40(3):164–9.

25.Parmelee D., Michaelsen LK. Team-based learning: it's here and it WORKS! Academic Medicine. 2010. 85(11):1658–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181f55a35.

26.Shin MJ., Ahn SH., Lee MA. Team-spirit experiences for new nurses through off-the job training. The Journal of Korean Academic Society Of Nursing Education. 2008. 14(1):108–16.

27.Lee CK., Ling YY., Leng LW., Chang SY. Comparing effectiveness of high-fidelity human patient simulation vs case-based learning in pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2014. 78(8):153. http://dx.doi.org/10.5688/ajpe788153.

28.Kim JH., Park IH., Shin SJ. Systematic review of Koreanstudies on simulation within nursing education. The Journal of Korean Academic Society Of Nursing Education. 2013. 19(3):307–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5977/jkasne.2013.19.3.307.

Figure 1.

Research design of this study.

Figure 2.

Flow of this study.

Table 1.

Learning Subjects, Objectives, Core Nursing Intervention Of the Scenario

Scenario	Learning subjects		Learning objectives	Core nursing intervention
Scenario I	Indication	Knowledge	․ Be able to know the definition and purpose of colonoscopy. ․ Be able to find the related information by analyzing and integrating various materials for the assessment of an examine	․ Implement physical examinations. ․ Implement pain assessments. ․ Interview. ․ (history, family history, medication history, present illness) ․ Explain about the purpose of diagnostic checks and physical examinations.
		Skill	․ Be able to assess the physical status and health of the examinee.
		Attitude	․ Be able to show the appearance of doing our best to the examinee.
Scenario II	Nursing before & after colonoscopy	Knowledge	․ Analyze and integrate various patient materials necessary for nursing before and after the colonoscopy. ․ Be able to understand how to take cleaning medicines and precautions related to them.	․ Implement pre-examinations educations. ․ Identify examination consent forms. ․ Explain about the intestine cleaning medicines. (directions, notices, side effects) ․ Explain about the activities after taking the intestine cleaning medicines. ․ Implement the infusion of aqueous solution into veins. ․ Explain about the examination processes. ․ Implement the post-examination educations
		Skill	․ Be able to implement nursing educations before and after the colonoscopy. ․ Be able to explain and educate about the prescribed intestine cleaning medicines. ․ Be able to administer the prescribed medicines.
		Attitude	․ Apply therapeutic communication skills before and after the colonoscopy. ․ Be able to explain about related matters so that the examinee can understand them.
Scenario III	Emergency care for bleeding after colonoscopy	Knowledge	․ Analyze and integrate various patient materials necessary in emergency related to the colonoscopy. ․ Be able to find the signs of bleeding and analyze various information. ․ Be able to explain and find the side effects of blood transfusion.	․ Implement the blood transfusion-related educations. ․ Start the blood transfusion and identify patient's side effects. ․ Stop the blood transfusion and connect normal saline. ․ Report to doctors. ․ Explain to the examinee and do emotional supports.
		Skill	․ Be able to implement the nursing for blood transfusion. ․ Be able to identify the side effects of blood transfusion and apply core nursing skills.
		Attitude	․ Be able to apply therapeutic communication skills to the examinee in emergency. ․ Be able to do emotional supports.

Table 2.

Homogeneity Test on Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Subjects (N=149)

Characteristics	Categories	Exp. (n=71)	Cont. (n=78)	x² or t	p
Characteristics	Categories	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	x² or t	p
Age (year)		22.48±0.88	22.56±0.78	-0.63	.532
Gender	Male	10 (14.1)	12 (15.4)	2.82	.204
Gender	Female	61 (85.9)	66 (84.6)	2.82	.204
The motivation for admission to nursing	To get a job	41 (57.7)	33 (42.3)	3.55	.169
	Other choice	15 (21.1)	23 (29.5)
	Self choice	15 (21.1)	22 (28.2)
Satisfaction with major	High	10 (14.1)	5 (6.4)	2.43	.297
	Medium	27 (38.0)	33 (42.3)
	Low	34 (47.9)	40 (51.3)
Satisfaction with school life	High	20 (28.2)	23 (29.5)	1.62	.654
	Medium	44 (62.0)	43 (55.1)
	Low	7 (9.9)	12 (15.4)
Satisfaction with clinical practice	High	5 (7.0)	6 (7.7)	0.74	.692
	Medium	22 (31.0)	29 (37.2)
	Low	44 (62.0)	43 (55.1)
Accumulated last semester grade	4.00~4.50	7 (9.9)	11 (14.1)	3.70	.296
	3.51~3.99	29 (40.8)	36 (46.2)
	3.00~3.50	30 (42.3)	22 (28.2)
	≤ 2.51	5 (7.0)	9 (11.5)

Exp.=experimental group; Cont.=control group.

Table 3.

Comparison of Nursing Performance between the Groups (N=149)

Variables	Groups	Exp. (n=71)	Cont. (n=78)	t^†	p	Source	F^‡	p
Variables	Groups	M±SD	M±SD	t^†	p	Source	F^‡	p
Knowledge	Post 7 days	8.18±1.13	6.52±1.61	11.94	＜ .001
Clinical	Pretest	54.07±5.96	53.05±4.99	1.14	.258	Group	194.58	＜ .001
Performance	Post 7 days	61.92±7.90	55.87±5.47	8.94	＜ .001	Time	176.55	＜ .001
	Post 8 weeks	72.07±3.77	68.41±4.82	23.35	＜ .001	Group×Time	101.01	＜ .001

Exp.=experimental group; Cont.=control group;

^† t-test;

^‡ Repeated Measure ANOVA.

TOOLS

Similar articles