Development of a simulation-based assessment to evaluate the clinical competencies of Korean nursing students. (January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Park, Kyongok; Ahn, Youngmee; Kang, Narae; Sohn, Min
• Is Part Of: Nurse education today. Volume 36(2016)
• Page Start: 337
• Page End: 341
• Publication Date: 2016-01
• Subjects: Asthma -- Diabetes -- Global rating scale -- Nursing students -- Simulation; Nursing -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Education, Nursing -- Periodicals; Soins infirmiers -- Étude et enseignement -- Périodiques; Nursing -- Study and teaching; Periodicals; 610.7307
• DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.08.020
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0260-6917

Abstract

Summary: Objectives: To describe a simulation-based assessment (SBA) to evaluate the clinical competencies of nursing students in children's health and to compare its results with grade point average (GPA), self-efficacy, topic-specific knowledge, and self-reported clinical competency using the Six-D Scale. Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive study recruited nursing students from a children's health clinical practicum. Students were assigned to either an asthma ( n = 55) or a type 1 diabetes ( n = 48) care scenario conducted on a high-fidelity simulator. Clinical competencies were assessed using the global rating scale (GRS) and a checklist. Results: Data on 103 students were analyzed. The SBA-GRS indicated that 64.6%–87.3% of students passed. The SBA-GRS showed a statistically significant positive association with the SBA checklist in both the asthma ( rho = .763, p < .001) and the type 1 diabetes ( rho = .475, p = .001) group. In the asthma group, the SBA-GRS and checklist showed statistically significant associations with GPA ( rho = .413, p = .002 vs. r = .508, p < .001) and the Six-D Scale ( rho = .266, p = .049 vs. r = .352, p = .008); in the diabetes group, only the SBA checklist showed a statistically significant association with self-efficacy ( r = .339, p = .018) and the Six-D Scale ( r = .373, p = .009). Four groups by SBA-GRS had statistically significant differences in scores on the SBA checklist in both groups ( F = 25.757, p < .001 in the asthma group; F = 4.790, p = .006 in the diabetes group) and GPA only in the asthma groups ( F = 6.095, p < .001). Conclusion: SBA was found to be feasible for nursing students. The GRS and checklist were reasonably correlated with other evaluation methods of student competency, but correlations were better with easier scenarios. Highlights: We developed a simulation-based assessment and assessed competencies of Korean nursing students using global rating scale (GRS) and checklist. We found good correlation between GRS and checklist. GRS was better associated with grade point average and self-reported clinical competency in an easier scenario.