الفهرس 
Literature reviewOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 217 |  |  |
| | | from | 217 | | |
Abstract
Summary
Introduction:
Today, considering the change in learning needs, changes of the pattern of diseases, and increased care needs, on the one hand, and the shortage of nurses as the largest part of the healthcare team as well as very high cost in nursing and medical education, on the other, the importance of caring for proper practical training has been multiplied (Abbaszade, Borhani & Sabzevari, 2013).
Practical training is considered an opportunity for learning skills by nursing students, which unlike theoretical classes, it is a very complex context packed with barriers in different dimensions (Higgs, Jones, Loftus & christensen, 2018).
Therefore, understanding the barriers against practical training can result in better finding solutions through enhancing learning quality, preventing expenditure of nonessential costs, and determining better strategies based on the recognized barriers (Mikkonen, Elo, Kuivila, Tuomikoski & Kaariainen, 2016).
Aim of the study:
The Present study aimed to:
Assess practical training barriers among nursing students in critical care settings which will be achieved through:-
• Assessment of barriers facing students during laboratory and hospital training.
• Assessment of factors affecting students’ satisfaction with their practical training at critical care settings.
Research question:
- What are the practical training barriers facing students during laboratory and hospital training?
- What are factors affecting students’ satisfaction with their practical training at critical care settings?
Research design:
A descriptive exploratory design was utilized to conduct this study.
Methodology:
Setting:
This study was conducted in central laboratory at faculty of nursing Ain Shams University and critical care settings at Ain Shams University hospital.
Subject:
A purposive sample of 70 second year students enrolled in academic year (2018-2019) at Faculty of Nursing Ain Shams University.
Tools of data collection:
Two tools were used for data collection:
I. Student Interview Questionnaire (Appendix I):
It is a self-administered questionnaire used to assess practical training barriers facing students. It was developed by the researcher in an Arabic language based on review of relevant recent related literatures.
This tool was divided into two parts as the following:
The 1st part: It is concerned with students’ personal demographic characteristics which included age, sex, marital status, residence, qualification, receiving practical training at critical care units before and attendance of any training courses related to critical care.
It is also included (38 questions) to assess barriers to practical training regarding the human element which encompasses characteristics of the trainer (11 questions), the commitment of the trainer within the skills lab (7 questions), ability of the trainer to communicate (9 questions), ability of the trainer to apply skills within critical care units (2 questions), feeling of students while dealing with critically ill patient (4 questions), and their opinions about nursing staff members working in critical care units (5 questions).
The 2nd part: it is include (38 questions) to assess barriers to practical training regarding the non-human element which encompasses the training environment at the skills lab (7 questions), hospital field training at Critical Care Units (7 questions), students’ opinion regarding equipment and supplies at skills lab (6 questions), students’ opinion regarding equipment and supplies at the hospital, (6 questions), students’ opinion about the regulations concerning the practical training of medical-surgical department (10 questions).
II. Student Satisfaction Level Questionnaire (Appendix II):
Developed by the researcher in an Arabic language based on review of relevant recent related literatures and completed by students to assess factors affecting their satisfaction with the practical training at critical care settings.
This tool was divided into five parts as the following:
Part 1: Trainer role pre-practical training (3 questions).
Part 2: Trainer role during practical training at the skills lab (13 questions).
Part 3: Trainer role during the practical training at the critical care settings (9 questions).
Part 4: Trainer role after practical training (5 questions).
Part 5: Trainer role during student evaluation at the end of practical training (10 questions).
Results:
The results of this study have shown the following:
- 65.7% of students felt stressed while dealing with the critically ill patients.
- 57.1% of students found that nurses didn’t help them to get information that they need about patients within the critical care units.
- 50% of students found that nurses didn’t help them during practical training in critical care units.
- 70% of students found that nursing staff members working in the critical care units were neither skilled nor experienced.
- 67.2% of students found that the area of the lab wasn’t suitable comparing to the number of students.
- 68.6% of students found that shortage in nursing staff of the critical care settings affected the level of practical training.
- 92.9% of students found that simulators weren’t available within the skills lab.
- 68.6% of students found that there was a shortage of supplies in critical care settings.
- 57.1% of students find that procedure book wasn’t written in a simple and easy language regarding the structured methods of the training process.
- 57.1% of students weren’t satisfied with the trainer role in connecting the theoretical curriculum and practice within the training process.
- 58.6% of the students had total satisfactory level regarding their practical training at critical care.
- There was highly statistical significant relation between students’ qualifications before joining the faculty and their total barriers and satisfaction about practical training about critical care.
- There was a highly statistical significant negative correlation between total barriers and students’ satisfaction about practical training in relation to the critical care.
Conclusion:
The results of this study concluded that, the practical training barriers at critical care settings were lack of students’ experience regarding critical care, lack of time, overcrowded clinical settings, lack of equipment and supplies, ineffective communication with nursing staff, students’ stress, lack of training skills of nursing staff, shortage in nursing staff, writing method critical care procedure and presence theory practice gap. Also, second year nursing students had a low satisfactory level regarding practical training at critical care at faculty lab and hospital.
Recommendations:
- Prepare a supportive learning environment through providing simulators at the critical care skills lab.
- Rephrase the critical care procedure book in a simple and easy language.
- Reducing the gap between the theoretical curriculum and practical application through successful transferring of knowledge among the individuals working in the organizations (faculty and hospital) through training courses and workshops.
- Adequate preparation and planning should be done cooperatively between student nurses, trainers and registered nurses in the clinical area.
- Encourage the nurses who working at the critical care settings to attend training courses to maintain their scientific and practical experience in order to play an effective role in clinical education.
- Replication of the current study on a large probability sample is recommended to achieve generalization of the results.
- Further studies should be designed to overcome barriers of practical training to improve students’ training and enhance their satisfaction.