Critical Thinking Disposition, Problem Solving Process, and Simulation-Based Assessment of Clinical Competence of Nursing Students in Pediatric Nursing.

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the correlation of critical thinking disposition and problem solving process, and the simulation-based assessment of clinical competence based on a survey of college nursing students.METHODS: In this descriptive correlation study, data for 214 nursing students were analyzed using t-test and Pearson correlation coefficients.RESULTS: Critical thinking disposition, problem solving process, and simulation-based assessment of clinical competence averaged 3.76+/-0.46 (out of 5), 3.67+/-0.47 (5), and 1.51+/-0.17 (2), respectively. A significant difference in scores for simulation-based assessment of clinical competence was found between the high-scoring group and low-scoring group in critical thinking disposition. A significant positive correlation was found between critical thinking disposition and nursing assessment, a sub-domain of clinical competence.CONCLUSION: The results suggest that success in simulation-based learning requires critical thinking disposition in the nursing students, and their critical thinking disposition plays a positive role in nursing assessment, which evaluates the patient's status in a complex situation. Simulation-based learning programs help assess the students' levels in their clinical judgement and performance, and identify their strengths and weaknesses so that the instructor can evaluate and improve the current teaching method.

Critical thinking disposition, problem solving process, and empathy among Nursing Students

“…The problem solving process showed positive correlation with perspective taking, fantasy, empathic concern, and negative correlation with personal distress. Critical thinking disposition and problem solving process were consistent with the previous study results showing positive correlation [11], [12].…”

“…Empathy of subjects was 3.50 for perspective taking, 2.63 for fantasy, 3.63 for empathic concern, and 3.03 for personal distress, and turned out similar in comparison with previous study which had measured by the same instrument for nursing students [5], [10]. Critical thinking disposition of nursing students was 3.41 in general, which was similar compared with the value reported by Yang [2], investigated with the same instrument for nursing students and lower than the previous result of 3.67 [11]. On the other hand, problem solving process was lower, showing 3.45, compared with the result of Kim et al [11] showing 3.76.…”

“…Critical thinking disposition of nursing students was 3.41 in general, which was similar compared with the value reported by Yang [2], investigated with the same instrument for nursing students and lower than the previous result of 3.67 [11]. On the other hand, problem solving process was lower, showing 3.45, compared with the result of Kim et al [11] showing 3.76. There was a positive correlation between critical thinking disposition and problem solving process [12].…”

“…There was a positive correlation between critical thinking disposition and problem solving process [12]. The reason this study result was lower than the one reported by Kim et al seems that critical thinking disposition was lower than the result reported by Kim et al [11] Critical thinking disposition of subjects showed positive correlation with perspective taking, fantasy, and empathic concern, and negative correlation with personal distress in empathy. The problem solving process showed positive correlation with perspective taking, fantasy, empathic concern, and negative correlation with personal distress.…”

Effects of high‐fidelity patient simulation led clinical reasoning course: Focused on nursing core competencies, problem solving, and academic self‐efficacy

“…Using simulation learning, students can link theory to clinical practice (McCaughey & Traynor, ), and develop clinical judgment applying integrated thinking skills (Hur & Roh, ). Several studies have been conducted in various situations, namely, pediatric (Kim, Nam, & Kim, ; Shin & Kim, ), maternity (Chung, Kim, & Park, ; H. Y. Kim, Ko, & Lee, ), and older adult simulation (Lasater, Johnson, Ravert, & Rink, ).…”