Clinical Learning Environment of the “Nursing of Childbearing Family” Course From the Students’ Perspectives: An Observational Prospective Study
Journal of Holistic Nursing and Midwifery
Introduction: The clinical environment, which includes “simulation labs, educators, teaching hospital, and clinical staff,” serves as an active pedagogical strategy that helps students translate their knowledge into technical skills and foster critical thinking. However, this strategy needs a periodic evaluation from students’ perspectives to be updated with technological advancements. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the clinical learning environment of the “nursing the childbearing family” course from the students’ perspectives. Materials and Methods: A study with an observational prospective design was conducted at simulation labs of the childbearing family course, School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. A convenient sample of 62 students (84.93% participation rate) willingly took part in this investigation. A structured questionnaire comprising 54 questions (50 multiple-choice and 4 open-ended questions) was used to students’ perspectives and clinical learning environment. Descriptive (frequency, percentage, Mean±SD) and inferential statistics (the Pearson test and paired t-test) were used to describe and compare the mean scores of the student’s performances before and after receiving the simulation training labs. Results: A total of 62 BSc nursing students (with a 100% response rate) enrolled in the Childbearing and Family Nursing course during the academic year took part in this study. The participants’ mean age was 20.75±0.97 years. Most of the study standards indicators of comparing students’ perspectives before and after clinical training reflected a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Notably, a significant relationship was observed between the students’ perspectives regarding the clinical site and clinical instructors (r=-0.641, P=0.001). Conclusion: Most students held positive perspectives toward the four standards of students’ clinical site, students’ view of their clinical instructor, effective working relationships between the university and the clinical site, and students’ perspectives of the simulation labs before and after the clinical training were positively significant. However, some views underscored the need for more coverage on some topics, such as obstetric emergencies, breech position, and amniotic fluid embolism. Therefore, the current study confirmed that assessing the clinical environment instilled more confidence in participants to go beyond the course procedures and seek more complex scenarios.
Open Access Status
This publication is not available as open access