基于讲座的学习与呈现-同化-讨论法在护理专业学生职业血源性病原体暴露教育中的比较：一项随机试验

Comparison of lecture-based learning with presentation-assimilation-discussion method in occupational bloodborne exposure education of nursing students, a randomised trial.

作者信息

Wen Heling, Zhang Rui, Zhou Zhenke, Hong Min, Huang Zheng, Jiang Yifeng, Chen Yu, Peng Lei

机构信息

Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610072, China.

Department of Surgery, The Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, 610044, China.

出版信息

BMC Nurs. 2024 Sep 29;23(1):702. doi: 10.1186/s12912-024-02365-2.

DOI:10.1186/s12912-024-02365-2

PMID:39343940

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11441161/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Occupational Bloodborne Exposures (OBEs) are incidents where healthcare workers come into contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials, leading to risks of transmitting bloodborne pathogens. Nursing students, often in direct contact with patients, face heightened risks due to their duties.

METHODS

First, we conducted a cross-sectional survey using a OBEs questionnaire to explore the knowledge, attitudes, practices, and needs regarding OBEs among nursing students. Subsequently, we used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the impact of the Presentation-Assimilation-Discussion (PAD) method with the traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) method on OBEs education for nursing students. Pre-test, post-test, and retention test were used to observe the teaching effectiveness, and the students' feedback on the teaching method was also observed.

RESULTS

In the cross-sectional survey, we found that nursing students lacked sufficient knowledge and management skills regarding OBEs but recognized the importance of standard precautions and expressed a desire for systematic OBEs training during their education and internships. In the RCT, the total, theoretical, and practical scores of the PAD and LBL groups were comparable in the pre-test (56.70 ± 3.47 vs. 56.40 ± 3.95, 33.09 ± 3.39 vs. 33.33 ± 2.44, 23.61 ± 4.66 vs. 23.07 ± 4.84, p > 0.05). After training, the PAD model demonstrated an advantage over the LBL model in immediate total (84.25 ± 4.06 vs. 78.95 ± 4.23, p < 0.001), theoretical (54.32 ± 2.43 vs. 51.44 ± 2.58, p < 0.001), and practical scores (29.93 ± 3.90 vs. 27.51 ± 4.33, p < 0.01). It also showed superior retention of total (69.05 ± 3.87 vs. 65.77 ± 2.94, p < 0.001) and theoretical scores (39.05 ± 3.05 vs. 36.23 ± 3.18, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the retention of practical scores between the two groups (30.00 ± 4.76 vs. 29.53 ± 3.73, p > 0.05). The PAD group benefited more across various learning dimensions but reported a higher study load.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that the PAD model could be a valuable approach for teaching OBEs to nursing students.

摘要

背景

职业性血源性病原体暴露（OBEs）是指医护人员接触血液或其他潜在传染性物质的事件，这会导致血源性病原体传播的风险。护理专业学生由于其职责所在，经常与患者直接接触，面临的风险更高。

方法

首先，我们使用一份关于职业性血源性病原体暴露的问卷进行了横断面调查，以探究护理专业学生对职业性血源性病原体暴露的知识、态度、实践和需求。随后，我们采用随机对照试验（RCT）来比较呈现 - 同化 - 讨论（PAD）方法与传统基于讲座的学习（LBL）方法对护理专业学生职业性血源性病原体暴露教育的影响。通过前测、后测和留存测试来观察教学效果，并观察学生对教学方法的反馈。

结果

在横断面调查中，我们发现护理专业学生对职业性血源性病原体暴露缺乏足够的知识和管理技能，但认识到标准预防措施的重要性，并表示希望在其教育和实习期间接受系统的职业性血源性病原体暴露培训。在随机对照试验中，PAD组和LBL组的总分、理论分和实践分在前测中具有可比性（56.70 ± 3.47对56.40 ± 3.95，33.09 ± 3.39对33.33 ± 2.44，23.61 ± 4.66对23.07 ± 4.84，p > 0.05）。培训后，PAD模式在即时总分（84.25 ± 4.06对78.95 ± 4.23，p < 0.001）、理论分（54.32 ± 2.43对51.44 ± 2.58，p < 0.001）和实践分（29.93 ± 3.90对27.51 ± 4.33，p < 0.01）方面显示出优于LBL模式的优势。在总分（69.05 ± 3.87对65.77 ± 2.94，p < 0.001）和理论分（39.05 ± 3.05对36.23 ± 3.18，p < 0.001）的留存方面也表现更优。然而，两组在实践分的留存方面没有显著差异（30.00 ± 4.76对29.53 ± 3.73，p > 0.05）。PAD组在各个学习维度上受益更多，但报告的学习负担更高。