A knowledge comparison of nursing students in perioperative versus other rotations

AORN Journal, Oct, 2004 by Linda M. Sigsby, Hossein N. Yarandi

LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Measurement periods took place during a three-year period, so factors in addition to the curriculum may have affected the study results. Television programs, use of the Internet, or other factors may have contributed to students' knowledge and their responses to the questionnaire. With repeated measures, there are possibilities of practice effects. Students may have remembered items on the questionnaire and responded accordingly. Grade point averages and SAT scores were not matched between students in the experimental and control groups, so the groups may not have been equivalent. This could result in differences in knowledge scores due to differences in ability. In addition, teaching methods and teacher effectiveness could be factors in the score differences. This study should be replicated in baccalaureate nursing programs with different curricula. It would be beneficial to test not only knowledge but also the application of knowledge in practice with patients who have undergone surgical interventions.

Data from this study indicate that the perioperative area is a favorable environment for learning about the care of patients who have experienced a surgical intervention. Clinical site selection in nursing education both historically and currently has been based on tradition as well as availability of clinical units. Although some of these factors are beyond faculty members' control, curricular implications are not.

More evidence needs to be sought regarding how patients on each clinical unit contribute to student learning. Nursing education requires decisions that are oriented to improving student and patient outcomes. (16) Creative approaches to clinical education can improve nursing education and student outcomes. The omission of perioperative patient care is a missed opportunity in nursing education.

TABLE 1
Summary Measures of Knowledge Scores

                     Number
                       of      Mean    Standard
Control group       students   score   deviation

Cohort 1 *
Junior year            62      47.48     10.69
Senior year            39      50.85     11.35

Cohort 2 **
Junior year            48      48.23     6.67
Senior year            64      50.34     11.73

                     Number
                       of      Mean    Standard
Experimental group  students   score   deviation

Cohort 1
Junior year            42      53.26     8.96
Senior year            44      55.27     7.62

Cohort 2
Junior year            51      52.02     6.76
Senior year            34      58.09     6.76

* Students in cohort 1 entered the missing program
in their junior year in fall 1998.

** Students in cohort 2 entered the nursing program
in the their junior year in fall 1999.

Figure 1 * Score comparisons between
experimental and control groups for
four testing periods.

              Control  Experimental
              group    group

Cohort 1
junior year    47.48        53.26

Cohort 1
senior year    50.85        55.27

Cohort 2
junior year    48.23        52.02

Cohort 2
senior year    50.34        58.09

Note: Table made from bar graph.