| Literature DB >> 35494091 |
Dongqin Kang1, Liyan Zhang2, Sanli Jin3, Yun Wang1, Renxiu Guo2.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative care simulations with standardized patients in improving the knowledge, skill performance, and critical thinking of newly hired oncology nurses.Entities:
Keywords: Nurse education; Palliative care; Quasi-experimental; Simulation; Standardized patients
Year: 2021 PMID: 35494091 PMCID: PMC9052844 DOI: 10.1016/j.apjon.2021.11.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs ISSN: 2347-5625
Figure 1Flow diagram of the participants of this study.
Contents of the palliative care simulation program.
| session | Global themes | Learning objectives | Basic details of case scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pain management | 1. Teach patients NRS to assess pain | Liu is a 65 years old male with advanced lung cancer, bone metastasis and current palliative care. Before his retirement, he was a professor in a university. He was conscious, had normal hearing, but had poor memory. On admission, he had traction pain in his right chest and now he had a break-out pain. |
| 2 | Special scenario communication | 1. Observe and find patients' depression | Zhang, a 65 years old woman with advanced gastric cancer, is currently receiving palliative care. She knows about her illness. Her husband died early and her daughter accompanied her. She helped her only daughter take care of her children in Beijing for three years. A year ago, he was diagnosed with gastric cancer. In recent one month, she had reduced defecation and exhaust, abdominal distension and pain, and the outpatient showed incomplete intestinal obstruction. When she received the treatment, the patient complained of physical fatigue, saying: “my body is getting weaker and weaker, so it's boring to live every day. Let me just to die.” |
| 3 | Turnover | 1. Evaluate pipeline, skin, mind and etc. before turning over | Li, a 80 years old man with advanced lung cancer with bone metastasis. He was admitted in wheelchair and moved with difficulty to prevent pressure injury, nurses need turn over every 2 h. |
Demographic characteristics in two groups.
| Simulation group | Control group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Mean (SD), years | 22.18 (1.12) | 21.85 (1.24) | −1.456 | 0.148 |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 4 (8%) | 6 (10%) | 0.153 | 0.480 |
| Female | 46 (92%) | 53 (90%) | ||
| Educational background | ||||
| College degree | 22 (44%) | 25 (42%) | 0.049 | 0.976 |
| Bachelor degree | 27 (54%) | 33 (56%) | ||
| Master degree | 1 (2%) | 1 (2%) | ||
| Average score in school | ||||
| ≤ 70 | 0 (0%) | 2 (3%) | 3.276 | 0.351 |
| 71–80 | 18 (36%) | 15 (25%) | ||
| 81–90 | 24 (48%) | 34 (58%) | ||
| 91–100 | 8 (16%) | 8 (14%) | ||
| Internship months in cancer hospital, Mean (SD) | 7.40 (3.40) | 8.08 (3.05) | 0.172 | 0.270 |
| Prior exposure to simulation | ||||
| Yes | 11 (22%) | 15 (25%) | 0.175 | 0.696 |
| No | 39 (78%) | 44 (75%) | ||
| Prior exposure to palliative care | ||||
| Yes | 7 (14%) | 9 (15%) | 0.034 | 0.854 |
| No | 43 (86%) | 50 (85%) | ||
t-test of independence.
Chi-square test.
Baseline scores of knowledge, skill performance in the simulation group and the control group.
| Measure | Simulation group | Control group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |||
| Knowledge of pain management | 31.50 (12.65) | 34.15 (11.19) | 1.162 | 0.248 |
| Knowledge of special scenario communication | 21.14 (8.38) | 18.54 (6.66) | −1.352 | 0.179 |
| Skill performance | 37.38 (14.26) | 38.44 (13.92) | 1.378 | 0.724 |
Post-test scores of knowledge, skill performance, critical thinking, and learning satisfaction in the simulation group and the control group.
| Measure | Simulation group | Control group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |||
| Knowledge of pain management (range 0–100) | 50.84 (13.45) | 32.15 (12.34) | −7.560 ( | < 0.001 |
| Knowledge of special scenario communication (range 0–100) | 61.08 (18.63) | 39.66 (19.65) | 5.031 ( | < 0.001 |
| Skill performance (range 0–100) | 98.98 (1.35) | 94.03 (9.57) | 2.808 ( | 0.005 |
| Total score of critical thinking (range 70–420) | 243.92 (24.54) | 213.88 (17.45) | 6.229 ( | < 0.001 |
| Truth seeking (range 10–60) | 30.86 (5.70) | 28.15 (6.08) | −2.380 ( | 0.019 |
| Open-mindedness (range 10–60) | 31.76 (4.94) | 28.81 (6.15) | 2.927 ( | 0.003 |
| Analyticity (range 10–60) | 37.96 (3.87) | 32.47 (6.87) | 5.016 ( | < 0.001 |
| Systematicity (range 10–60) | 35.58 (5.21) | 34.41 (6.91) | 1.435 ( | 0.154 |
| Critical thinking self-confidence (range 10–60) | 41.5 (6.29) | 39.80 (6.10) | 1.326 ( | 0.188 |
| Inquisitiveness (range 10–60) | 38.14 (5.00) | 34.37 (7.58) | 2.489 ( | 0.014 |
| Cognitive maturity (range 10–60) | 27.72 (5.71) | 24.80 (7.72) | −2.210( | 0.029 |
| Total score of learning satisfaction (range 32–160) | 153.44 (11.85) | 142.90 (14.22) | 5.144 ( | < 0.001 |
| Teacher teaching (range 13–65) | 62.48 (4.86) | 58.73 (5.83) | 4.479 ( | < 0.001 |
| Learning curriculum (range 7–35) | 33.48 (2.70) | 30.76 (3.42) | 4.698 ( | < 0.001 |
| Learning environment (range 5–25) | 23.90 (1.95) | 21.98 (3.25) | 3.524 ( | < 0.001 |
| Learning achievement (range 7–35) | 33.58 (2.63) | 31.42 (3.24) | 4.128 ( | < 0.001 |