1Education Developmentak Center, Medical University,Kerman,IRAN
2Social medicine department,Medical University,Kerman,IRAN
Background Being familiar with new teaching methods and comparing their result helps teachers achieve better planning for applying such methods in the future. This study is aimed on comparing the efficiency of electronic learning and workshop on knowledge and performance of nursing students in controlling nosocomial infections. Methods Two groups were selected by pre-test post-test method. Students were randomly divided into two groups of electronic and workshop learning. A one-day workshop was held for the workshop group, and the electronic group received slides via email. Knowledge and performance of the two groups were evaluated and compared with each other using questionnaires prior to and after two weeks, and the data were analyzed by SPSS 18. Results Students of the electronic groups achieved better scores compared to the workshop group (P<0.001). Regarding performance, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P=0.6). Conclusion According to the results of this research and other studies, both workshop and virtual methods can be used to educate nursing students, but it seems that the combination of the two methods would be more effective to increase knowledge and skills.
1. Reime MH, Harris A, Aksnes J, Michelson J. The most successful method in teaching nursing students infection controle-learning or lecture? Nurs Educ Today 2008; 28 (7): 798-806.
2. Rezaei B, Rahimi M. Knowledge and practice of infection control nurse in hospital. 2010; 1(2): 35-8.
3. Allahbakhshi A, Moghadasiyan S, Parvan K, Ahhahbakhshiyan M. Knowledge, attitude and practice of intensive care unit nurses about infection control and hospital health centers of Tabriz. Journal of nursing 2011; 23: 17-28. [In Persian].
4. Gheybizadeh M. Small group training. Iranian journal of education in medical sciences 2004; 46: 10. [In Persian].
5. Monie R. Development of distance learning in higher education. Opportunities and challenges 2004; 31: 43-52.
6. Haghani F, Shariatmadari A, Naderi A, Yousefi A. Training methods used for continuing medical education programs at the university. Iranian journal of medical education 2004; 3(2):. [Persian].
7. Naderi A, Abghae R, Mohammad Poor Y, Ghorbanzade K. Comparison of two methods of competency-based training and traditional training active learning and cognitive skills of the clinical practitioner ICU. Iranian journal of medical education 2013; 12(7): 698-708. [In Persian].
8. Litzelman DK, Stratus GA, Marriott DJ, Skiff KM. Factorial validation of a widely disseminated educational framework for evaluating clinical teachers. Academes 1998; 73(6): 688.
9. Mehrdad N. Learning from a distance. Educational news magazine of Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2003; 2(16) [Persian].
10. Johnson SD, Aragon SR, Shaik N. Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of interactive learning research 2000; 11(1): 29-49.
11. Whitten P, Ford DJ, Davis N, Speicher R, Collins B. Comparison of face-to-face versus interactive video continuing medical education delivery modalities. J Contin Educ Health Prof 1998; 18(2): 93-9.
12. Zolfaghari M , Mehrdad N, Parsa Yektaz Z, Salmani Barogh N. Impact of elearning methods and learning lessons address maternal and child health nursing students. Iranian journal of medical education 2008; 7(1): 31-9. [In Persian].
13. Ghasemi M. How they managed a business education: university issued/effective health educationeducational staff of Health Department of Health, Ahwaz University of Medical Sciences, 2003. [In Persian].
14. Carpenito LJ. Mandatory updating: A life time commitment. Nurse Times 1991; 87(48): 53-5.
15. Ghodosiyan A, Ghasemi M, Sarmast H. Fundamentals and applications of educational technology in health promotion. Tehran: Bahr-ol-Olum; 2004. [In Persian].
16. Ghanbari A, Atrkar Roshan Z. Comparison with CD and Bvklt training on nursing and midwifery students in their learning processes BSE. Academic journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences 2006; 12(4): 33-8. [In Persian].
17. Jenkins S, Goel R, Morrell DS. Computer-assisted instruction versus traditional lecture for medical student teaching of dermatology morphology: A randomized control trial. JAM Acad Dermatol 2008; 59(2): 255-9.
18. Abdelaziz M, Samer Kamal S, Kerman O, Abdel Rahman A .Evaluation of elearning program versus traditional lecture instruction for undergraduate nursing students in a faculty of nursing. Teach Learn Nurs 2011; 6: 50.
19. Hart P, Eaton L, Buckner M, Morrow BN, Barrett DT, Fraser DD, et al . Effectiveness of a computer-based educational program on nurses' knowledge' attitude, and skill level related to evidencebased practice. Worldviews Evid Base Nurs 2008; 5(2): 75-84.
20. Chang WY, Sheen SHT, Chang PC, Lee PH. Developing an e-learning education program for staff nurses: processes and outcomes. Nurse Educ Today 2009; 28: 822-8.
21. Jeffries PR, Woolf S, Linde B. Technology-based vs. traditional instruction. A comparison of two methods for teaching the skill of performing a 12- lead ECG. Nurs Educ Perspect 2003; 24: 7074.
22. Elfessi A. Examining student performance and attitudes toward the use of information technology in a virtual and conventional setting. Journal of interactive on line learning 2004; 2: 1-9.
23. Engum SA, Jeffries P, Fisher L. Intravenous catheter training system: computer- based education versus traditional learning methods. Am J Surg 2003; 186: 67-74.
24. Dixon H,Horden A,Borland R(2011).The breast cancer distance education program .cancer nursing ,24:44- 52
25. Borhani F, Vatanparast M, Abbaszadeh A, Ranjbar H, ShojaeiPour R. Virtual education effect on cognitive learning and attitude of nursing students towards it. Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research 2011; 16(4): 15. [Persian].
26. Kangari H, Alipour A, Tabatabaee SM. A comparison of the learning outcomes of traditional lecturing with that of computerbased learning in two optometry courses. Journal of medical education 2007; 11(3-4): 63-6. [Persian].