View
73
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Case Study Scenarios: Integrating QSEN Competency Responses . Presented by: Lori Sprenger, PhD, RN. OBJECTIVES The participant will: . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Case Study Scenarios: Integrating QSEN
Competency Responses Presented by: Lori Sprenger, PhD, RN
OBJECTIVES The participant will:
1. Recognize the importance of integrating QSEN competencies into case study (CS) scenarios that may be used in a variety of nursing education settings. 2. Understand the process for implementing CS with QSEN integration into a variety of nursing education settings. 3. Critique the effectiveness of implementing CS with QSEN integration into a variety of nursing education settings.
Objective 1: Recognize the importance of integrating QSEN competencies into case study (CS) scenarios that may be used in a variety of nursing education settings.
QSEN Purpose (QSEN Institute, 2005-2014) Increase patient safety Increase overall prevalence of quality patient-care
outcomes
Goals of QSEN intervention strategy is to enable nursing students to…1. Understand the importance of QSEN 2. Feel empowered and confident to apply QSEN
competencies to hypothetical and real patient-care situations in both the acute care and community care settings.
Objective 2: Implement CS w/QSEN integration into a variety of educational settings
Classroom setting Whole group discussion Small group discussion
Oral presentation Students create their own CS and QSEN
integration questions Online course room setting
Individual or group responses Initial response to graded discussion area Peer responses to CS including QSEN
responses
Objective 2 (continued) Clinical post-conference
Individual patients (acute care or community setting) F2F sharing of QSEN integration Online post conference sharing
Groups of patients in the community setting F2F sharing of QSEN integration Online post conference sharing
Objective 3: Critique the effectiveness of the intervention
Qualitative response from students Verbal or written responses to open-ended questions
Students’ overall general opinions about the CS w/ QSEN integration
What students liked best What students did not like Ask about students’ levels of confidence with applying
QSEN integration into CS scenarios What could be done to improve the CS w/ QSEN
integration strategy How did the CS w/QSEN competency integration
enhance your patient-care skills in the clinical setting?
Objective 3 (continued)
Quantitative Closed ended question with yes or no response
Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity on your own another time? Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity as a small group activity
another time? Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity as a classroom discussion
another time? Develop a Likert scale questionnaire regarding level of self-
confidence (Shell, Murphy, & Bruning, 1989) 0 = poor level of confidence, 5 = average level of self-confidence, 10 highly self-
confident My level of confidence with completing the CS w/QSEN integration alone is: My level of confidence with completing the CS w/QSEN integration in a small
group is: My level of confidence with completing the CS w/ QSEN integration in an open
discussion classroom setting is: Develop a Likert scale questionnaire about general overall opinion
0---did not like, 5---no opinion, 10---liked it a lot My overall general opinion of the CS w/ QSEN integration is:
Evaluation Tool
Evaluation tool (continued)
Evaluation tool (continued)Open-ended response:
How did the case study (CS) with QSEN competency integration affect your patient-care interactions and patient-care outcomes in the clinical setting?
Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative
Helpful for participants1. Increased critical thinking skills
2. Increased student confidence
3. Increased knowledge of pharm concepts
4. Overall, helpful in general
Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative (continued)
Helpful for patient care1. Increased patient education2. Provided rationale and knowledge for patient care3. Increased patient safety4. Increased medication safety5. Increased understanding of patient’s perspectives6. Helped ensure patient’s involvement in care7. Increased collaboration8. Increased focus on QSEN integration9. Increased focus on WPN (Whole Person Nursing) and patient-centered care
Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative (continued)
Non-helpful comments1. Hard to relate QSEN to patient care due to
lack of exposure2. Did not apply QSEN to patient care3. Did not enjoy doing CS w/QSEN integration4. Time consuming to do CS w/QSEN integration5. CS w/ QSEN integration were not helpful
Results of Evaluation (N = 37): Quantitative
Quantitative—Mean SE ALONE = 8.9189 SMALL GROUPS = 9.3514 CLASS DISCUSSION = 9.5000
--Mean are different, but not statistically different--Results not generalizable to a larger population
ReferencesQSEN Institute. (2005-2014). Competencies. Retrieved from http://qsen.org/competencies/Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
81(1), 91–100. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.1.91
Thank you!
What questions do you have?
Recommended