- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Hendricks, Susan"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item A Simulation Pre-Brief Scaffold to Support Clinical Judgment and Independence in Clinical Judgment Decision Making(2024-01) McIntire, Emily S.; Friesth, Barbara Manz; Hendricks, Susan; Reising, Deanna; Danish, JoshuaIt is essential that nurses independently assume patient care, yet new nurses lack necessary clinical judgment skills. The purpose of this study was to examine a simulation pre-brief scaffold to support nursing students’ clinical judgment development and clinical judgment independence. The pre-brief experiential learning scaffold for clinical judgment independence (PELS-CJI) framework informed simulation pre-brief in this experimental study. A convenience sample included traditional and accelerated Bachelor of Science in nursing students in their senior year. Participants were randomly assigned to complete a simulation pre-brief with or without the Interactive-Video Recorded Simulation (I-VRS). Nursing student’s total clinical judgment and individual components of clinical judgment (noticing, interpreting, and responding) in simulation were measured by a single evaluator blinded to condition using the Lasater clinical judgment rubric (LCJR) (Cronbach’s alpha .932). To measure clinical judgment independence, the number of unintended conceptual cues during simulation were counted. Participants in the intervention group had higher clinical judgment scores during simulation (n = 31, M = 28.45, SD = 5.163) as compared to the control group (n = 36, M = 25.06, SD = 5.275), t(65) = -2.653, p < .01. A significant relationship for the noticing and responding subscales of clinical judgment was observed between groups, but not for the interpreting subscale. No significant difference in the number of unintended cues was found between groups. Results support that using an I-VRS in simulation pre-brief enhanced clinical judgment in simulation. The use of the I-VRS adds to the existing limited evidence related to simulation pre-brief to support clinical judgment development among undergraduate nursing students. Future research using an I-VRS during pre-brief is necessary to determine if improvement in clinical judgment is retained and transferrable to the clinical setting. Additional testing of the PELS-CJI to guide simulation pre-brief is encouraged.Item Processes used by nursing faculty when working with underperforming students in the clinical area: a theoretical model derived from grounded theory(2015-04-09) Craven, Marianne; Burke-Draucker, Claire; Thomas-Dreifuerst, Kristina; Hendricks, Susan; Pesut, Daniel J.Clinical nursing faculty members often work with students who underperform in the clinical area. Underperforming students are those who exhibit deficits in nursing knowledge, the application of nursing knowledge, psychomotor skills, motivation, and/or interpersonal skills. The outcomes of faculty work with underperforming students have implications for patient safety and the nursing workforce, yet little is known about how faculty work with underperforming students. The purpose of this project was to develop a theoretical framework that describes how clinical faculty work with underperforming students in the clinical area. Twenty-eight nursing faculty who had worked with underperforming nursing students during clinical rotations were interviewed and invited to tell stories about working with these students. Their narratives were analyzed using constant comparison analysis, and a theoretical framework was developed. The framework included three stages that unfolded as faculty worked with underperforming students over time. The first stage, Being Present, was the process by which faculty came to know students were underperforming. They did this by noticing red flags, taking extra time with students, working side-by-side with students, and connecting with students "where they were at." The second stage, Setting a New Course, was the process by which faculty attempted to provide remedial experiences to improve the performance of those students determined to be underperforming. The participants did this by beginning a new course of instruction for the students, bringing in new people to help the students, and creating new learning experiences for them. This process could result in students turning it [their performance] around, making it through [the clinical rotation], or not making it. The final stage, Being Objective, was the process by which participants made negative progression decisions. They did this by relying on objective indices, documenting problematic student behaviors, and obtaining validation for their decisions.