面对面教育与视频教育：它们对护士的压疮知识有影响吗？

In-Person and Video-Based Education: Do They Affect Pressure Injury Knowledge in Nursing?

作者信息

İnangil Demet, Ertürk Nilüfer, Pakdil Elif Lale, Türkoğlu İlayda, Torun Özgül, Kabuk Ayşe

机构信息

Demet İnangil, PhD, RN, is Associate Professor, Nursing Department, Hamidiye Faculty of Nursing, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey. Nilüfer Ertürk, RN, and Elif Lale Pakdil, RN, are nurses in the Ostomy and Wound Care Department, Health Sciences University, Sultan Abdulhamid Han Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul. İlayda Türkoğlu, MSN, RN, is Research Assistant, Hamidiye Faculty of Nursing, University of Health Sciences. Özgül Torun, RN, is a nurse in the Ostomy and Wound Care Department, Health Sciences University, Sultan Abdulhamid Han Training and Research Hospital. Ayşe Kabuk, PhD, RN, is Assistant Professor, Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak.

出版信息

Adv Skin Wound Care. 2024;37(11&12):1-7. doi: 10.1097/ASW.0000000000000240.

DOI:10.1097/ASW.0000000000000240

PMID:39792522

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine how training on the nursing care of pressure injuries (PIs) affects knowledge levels and satisfaction.

METHODS

This study was semiexperimental, conducted in the form of a pretest and posttest in one group of 105 nurses working in a training and research hospital. The training took place in person and via video. All nurses included in the study group first received in-person training in 15-person groups followed by weekly video training for 4 consecutive weeks. Before training, investigators assessed the nurses' PI knowledge using the Nurses' Knowledge Level Assessment for PI Care (NKLAPIC; pretest). After the in-person module (posttest 1) and video-based module (posttest 2), investigators provided the NKLAPIC again. The independent-sample test, one-way analysis of variance, repeated-test-measures analysis of variance, Bonferroni test, and pairwise comparisons were used in data analysis.

RESULTS

Mean NKLAPIC scores were 47.71 ± 13.5 (out of 100 points) at pretraining, 68.5 ± 12.32 after the in-person training, and peaked at 72.38 ± 4.74 after video-based training (P < .001). Video-based training appeared to lead to a larger increase in knowledge levels than in-person training alone (P < .001). Further, although the average satisfaction score given to the in-person training was 3.97 ± 0.93, the same score for the online training was 4.12 ± 0.95 (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes suggest that in-person training and video-based training regarding PI care improve the knowledge levels of nurses.

摘要

目的

确定压力性损伤护理培训如何影响知识水平和满意度。

方法

本研究为半实验性研究，对一家培训与研究医院的105名护士进行了前测和后测。培训通过面对面和视频形式进行。研究组的所有护士首先以15人一组的形式接受面对面培训，随后连续4周每周进行视频培训。培训前，研究人员使用压力性损伤护理护士知识水平评估量表（NKLAPIC；前测）评估护士的压力性损伤知识。在面对面培训模块（后测1）和视频培训模块（后测2）之后，研究人员再次提供NKLAPIC。数据分析采用独立样本检验、单因素方差分析、重复测量方差分析、Bonferroni检验和两两比较。

结果

培训前NKLAPIC平均得分是47.71±13.5（满分100分），面对面培训后为68.5±12.32，视频培训后达到峰值72.38±4.74（P<.001）。与单独的面对面培训相比，视频培训似乎能使知识水平有更大提高（P<.001）。此外，虽然面对面培训的平均满意度得分是3.97±0.93，但在线培训的相同得分是4.12±0.95（P>.05）。