The Effect of Problem-Based Learning Clinical Education on Nursing Student's Critical Thinking

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Trauma Nursing Research Centre, Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Kashan University of Medical Science, Kashan, Iran

2 Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Problem-based clinical education is an effective strategy for enhancing creativity, group work, leadership and problem-solving skills in nursing students. It seems PBL can improve nursing students’ critical thinking skills. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of problem-based clinical education on nursing students’ critical thinking.
Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in Kashan University of Medical Science in 2015. In total, 36 nursing students were recruited and were allocated to either the conventional or the problem-based clinical education. A demographic questionnaire and the California Critical Thinking Skills Test, Form B, were used for data collection. Students’ critical thinking skills were assessed both at the beginning of their clinical course and one week after it. The SPSS software was employed for performing the independent- and the paired-samples t as well as the Mann-Whitney U tests.
Results: The mean of students’ critical thinking score in the conventional clinical education group increased significantly from 10.94±1.85 to 11.88±1.86 (P=0.016). In the problem-based education group, the mean of critical thinking score also increased from 10.72±1.44 to 13.33±1.67 (P=0.0004). Before the study, the groups did not differ significantly regarding the scores of critical thinking. However, the posttest value of critical thinking score in the problem-based education group was significantly higher than the score in the conventional education group.
Conclusions: Both conventional and problem-based clinical educations significantly improved nursing students’ critical thinking. However, the problem-based clinical education strategy was more effective than the conventional one. 

Keywords


INTRODUCTION

Educational systems worldwide are searching for the most effective teaching strategies in order to foster thoughtful critical thinkers (1, 2). Critical thinking (CT) and independent information-seeking skills are the prerequisites to informed decision making (3). CT is a cognitive activity and an organized subjective attempt which employs skills such as data analysis and reasoning for evaluating and understanding phenomena and their interrelationships (4, 5).

CT is essential to sound clinical practice (4, 6). During their daily practice, nurses face different novel and problematic situations. Accordingly, they need to have considerable professional knowledge and skills (such as data collection, data analysis, decision-making, and clinical judgment) in order to develop and employ sound strategies for effectively managing such situations (6–8). CT can facilitate this process and empower nurses to accurately assess patients, identify their needs, and employ the most effective strategies for providing quality care and fulfilling the identified needs (3, 6, 7, 9).

Recently, CT has been incorporated into the educational curriculum of nursing (7, 10, 11). Nonetheless, little attention is being paid to educating this skill to nursing students (12). Previous studies have shown that nursing students have limited CT ability (3, 4, 9, 10). For instance, in studies conducted by Gazer et al. (2010) and Kawashima and Petrini (2001), nursing students achieved low CT scores (3, 10). Eslami and Maarefi (2008) and Taheri et al. (2006) evaluated Iranian nursing students’ CT and reported the same finding (4, 9).

Nursing instructors usually strive to employ strategies for developing students’ CT ability (13). One of the effective strategies for helping them manage novel situations in their daily practice is problem-based learning (13). Problem-based learning (PBL) was first introduced and employed by McMaster University, Canada, in 1960. PBL is a student-centered learning strategy in which students from small groups and work together to identify problems, collect the necessary data about it, and understand and manage their problems (14, 15). Accordingly, PBL necessitates self-directedness and collaborative work. In other words, PBL teaches students how to learn (11).

Previous studies have investigated the effects of PBL in theoretical nursing education. The results of a qualitative study conducted by Klunklin et al. (2011) revealed that Thai students perceived PBL as an effective strategy for enhancing their creativity, group work, leadership, CT, and problem-solving skills (14). Students who had participated in a study done by Yuan et al. (208) also noted that PBL improves nursing students’ CT skills (16). Other studies also showed that compared with traditional teaching methods, PBL significantly improved nursing students’ CT scores (17, 18). However, Worrell and Profetto-McGrath (2007) and Oja (2011) highlighted that inadequate evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of PBL on nursing students’ CT skills and hence, further studies are needed for providing decisive evidence (19, 20). On the other hand, Ehrenberg and Haggblom (2007) reported that PBL has not yet been applied to clinical nursing education (21). This study was undertaken to bridge this gap. The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of problem-based clinical education on nursing students’ CT.

 

METHODS                                                                                  

This single-blind cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in 2015 in the Nursing and Midwifery Faculty of Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran. All 36 students who had taken the Heart and Lung Medical-Surgical Clinical Course in the second semester of the educational year of 2015 were recruited by using the census method. The inclusion criteria were having taken the aforementioned course at the time of the study and having passed the Heart and Lung Care Medical Surgical Theoretical Course. Students were excluded if they did not attend the clinical course regularly or opted to continue their education at another university. This study was conducted from September 2015 to December 2015.

The California Critical Thinking Skills Test, Form B (CCTS-B), was used for data collection. The CCTS-B specifically evaluates CT ability at post-high school level and contains 34 five-choice questions in five areas including interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning. Right and wrong answers are scored 1 and 0, respectively. Accordingly, the total score of the scale ranges from 0 to 34 (22, 23).

The CCTS Form B was previously translated into Persian language by Akhoundzadeh et al.(24) And showed appropriate psychometric properties. They also confirmed the instrument’s content validity and reliability using Kouder-Richardson coefficient that was 0.62. The test was able to distinguish between CTS in nursing and philosophy students (25).

At the first session of their clinical course, all students in each group were asked to complete the CCTS-B within 45 minutes. Then, they were subjected to clinical education either by using the conventional or the problem-based methods. Problem-based clinical education was provided in six steps as follows. First, we provided information about PBL method to students. In the second step, students were presented with a problematic situation. Accordingly, they were asked to assess patients, take their medical history, identify their problems, and establish relevant nursing diagnoses. In the third step, they were guided and asked to collect necessary data about the identified problems. The fourth step was related to formulating hypotheses on possible nursing measures for resolving patients’ problems. In the fifth step, students tested their hypotheses through implementing the developed nursing measures. In the last step, they evaluated their interventions, made conclusions, and generalized their findings. Clinical education in the conventional group was provided by using the case method and the seminar discussion methods. The length of intervention for each of the four groups was 27 hours (two 4.5-hour sessions a week for three consecutive weeks). One week after each intervention, students were invited to recomplete the CCTS-B within 40 minutes.

 

Ethical considerations

Official approvals were obtained from the Institutional Review Board and the Ethics Committee of Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan (Grand Number: 9478). The confidentiality of participants’ data was guaranteed and all of them signed the informed consent form of the study.

 

Data analysis

Study data were analyzed by using the SPSS v. 16.0. Primarily, the Kolmogrov-Smirnoc test was performed for comparing the distributions of the study variables with the normal distribution. Accordingly, the independent-samples t, the paired-samples t, the Chi-square, and the Mann-Whitney U tests were used for data analysis. A p-value less than 0.05 was assumed as significant.

 

RESULTS

Totally, 36 students participated in the study among whom; one student was excluded due to his irregular attendance at the course (Figure 1). The mean of the participants’ ages was 20.77±0.69. Most of the participants were female students (65.7%). The Mann-Whitney U and the Chi-square tests showed that before the study, there were no significant differences between the groups regarding participants’ age, gender, and three-year grade point average (P value > 0.05; Table 1).

The independent-samples t test revealed no significant difference between the two groups concerning the pretest values of CCTS-B scores (P value 0.69). However, after the intervention, the students in the problem-based education group obtained significantly higher CCTS-B scores than the students in the conventional clinical education group (P value = 0.021; Table 2). Moreover, the paired-samples t test demonstrated that the posttest values of CT in both groups were significantly higher than the pretest values. In other words, both conventional and problem-based clinical educations significantly improved students’ CT ability. Finally, the Mann-Whitney U test indicated that the within-group pretest-posttest mean differences of the analysis, inductive reasoning, and inference domains in the problem-based education group were significantly higher than those of the conventional clinical education group (P value < 0.05; Table 3).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Consort flow diagram

 

 

 

Table 1: The comparison of demographic information between two groups.

P value

Conventional clinical education

Problem-based clinical education

 

Group

N (%)

N (%)   

P = 0.72

5 (29.4)

7 (38.9)

male

Gender

12 (70.6)

11 (61.1)

Female

 

Mean± SD

Mean ±SD

 

P = 0.18††

20.59±0.61

20.94±0.72

Age

P = 0.72††

16.96±0.56

16.88±0.73

Three-year grade point average

 

Chi-square

††Mann-Whitney

           

 

 

 

Table 2:The comparison of Critical thinking score before and after the intervention in two groups.

 

P value

 

Conventional clinical education

Problem-based clinical education

Group

Mean± SD

Mean ±SD

Critical thinking score

P = 0.69

10.94±1.85

10.72±1.44

Before clinical education

P = 0.021

11.88±1.86

13.33±1.67

After clinical education

 

P = 0.016

P = 0.0004

P value††

T-test

†† Paired t-test

 

 

Table 3: The comparison of the mean of difference between before and after critical thinking score in two groups.

 

P value

 

 

difference between before and after score in conventional clinical education

difference between before and after score in

problem-based clinical education

Domains in critical thinking skills

P = 0.67

0.05±0.82

0.16±0.92

Evaluation

P = 0.0004

0.11±0.85

0.94±0.53

Analysis

P = 0.005

0.17±0.95

1.05±0.63

Interpretation

P = 0.02

0.94±0.55

1.38±0.50

Deductive reasoning

P = 0.85

0.29±0.68

0.33±0.68

Inductive reasoning

Mann-Whitney

 

 

 

DISCUSSION

This study was undertaken to investigate the effects of problem-based clinical education on nursing students’ CT. Study findings revealed that the pretest-posttest mean difference of CCTS-B score in the problem-based education group was 2.77 times more than the conventional clinical education group (2.61 vs. 0.94, respectively). This difference was statistically significant. In other words, problem-based clinical education was more effective than conventional clinical education in improving nursing students’ CT ability. Previous studies have not evaluated the effects of problem-based clinical education on students’ CT. However, several studies have been done to evaluate the effects of problem-based theoretical nursing education on students’ CT ability. For instance, a quasi-experimental study conducted by Ozturk et al. (2008) showed that problem-based education was more effective than traditional lecture-based education in enhancing students’ CT ability (17). Yuan et al. (2008) also reported that compared with lecture method, problem-based education had stronger effects on students’ CT ability (16). Problem-based clinical education helps students assess patients more carefully and identify their problems and needs more accurately. This technique enables them to critically analyze a given situation and seek all possible solutions to the existing problems. According to Yuan et al. (2008), PBL techniques such as data collection, data sharing, small group discussions, hypothesis making, and hypothesis testing are all effective in enhancing students’ CT ability (16).

Study findings also revealed that problem-based clinical education significantly improved students’ inference, inductive reasoning, and analysis skills. Yuan et al. (2008) also found that compared with lecture method, problem-based education was more effective in improving students’ analysis and deductive reasoning skills (16). Hosseini et al. (2014) also reported that an active education approach significantly enhanced students’ analysis and deductive reasoning skills (26). Students who had participated in a study conducted by Barrow et al. (2002) also referred to problem-based education as an effective means for improving their exploration, group discussion and work, clinical reasoning, and evaluation skills (27). As a student-centered teaching approach, problem-based clinical education provides students with a participatory and interactive learning environment and actively involves them in their learning. In this approach, students need to assess a situation and all associating problems and search for the best solutions. Accordingly, PBL encourages them to thoughtfully analyze the situation and make reasonable inferences (16).

The present study investigated the effects of problem-based clinical education on only students’ CT ability. However, previous studies reported that beside CT ability, this teaching strategy also improves students’ exploration, group discussion and work, clinical reasoning, and self-directed skills, enhances their pleasure in learning, and promotes their in-depth learning (27–29). Panjehpour and Ataei (2012) also found that Iranian students’ satisfaction with problem-based education was about 70% (30). Ehrenberg and Haggblom (2007) and Chou and Chin (2009) also reported that students consider problem-based education as a great experience which promotes their freedom in learning and requires them to assume greater responsibility towards their own learning (19, 31). Accordingly, this strategy can be used as an effective teaching strategy for improving students’ CT ability, promoting their learning, and enhancing their satisfaction.

Both conventional and problem-based clinical educations significantly improved nursing students’ critical thinking. However, the problem-based clinical education strategy was more effective than the conventional one. Given the limited effectiveness of current teaching strategies in improving students’ CT, it is recommended to incorporate problem-based education into nursing clinical education.

The study limitation was its relatively small sample size. Accordingly, conducting large-scale studies for investigating the effects of problem-based clinical education on students’ CT ability, learning, and satisfaction with learning is recommended.

 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
Authors would like to acknowledge all those who cooperated with us in this research project.

Research committee approval and financial support:
The approval code of the research is 9478 confirmed by Research Department of Kashan University of Medical Sciences.

Conflict of interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

1-      Mangena A, Chabeli MM. Strategies to overcome obstacles in the facilitation of critical thinking in nursing education. Nurs Educ Today 2005; 25: 291-8.

2-       Maghsoudi M, Etemadifar SH, Haghani F. Improving critical thinking of students: A great challenge in clinical nursing education. Iran J Med Educ 2011; 10(5): 1110-20.

3-       Gezer N, Kantek F, Öztürk N. Profile and critical thinking levels of nursing students in a health School. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2010; 9: 2057-61.

4-      Taheri N, Hojati H, Cheraghian B, Esmaieli T. Critical thinking in nursing students of Abadan Nursing Faculty. Dena Journal 2008; 3(3): 1-7. [In Persian].

5-       Angeli C, Valanides N. Instructional effects on critical thinking: Performance on ill-defined issues. Learn Instruct 2009; 19: 322-34.

6-       Jones J, Morris L. Evaluation of critical thinking skills in an associate degree nursing program. Teach Learn Nurs 2007; 2: 109-15.

7-       Allen G, Rubenfeld MG, Scheffer B. Reliability of assessment of critical thinking. J Prof Nurs 2004; 20(1): 15-22.

8-       Eslami Akbar R, Maarefi F. A comparison of the critical thinking in the first and last term baccalaureate students of nursing and clinical nurses of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences in 1386. Journal of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences 2008; 8(1): 37-44. [In Persian].

9-       Shin S, Ha J, Shine K, Davis M. Critical thinking ability of associate, baccalaureate and RN-BSN senior students in Korea. Nurs Outlook 2006; 54: 328-33.

10-   Kawashima A, Petrini MA. Study of critical thinking skills in nursing students and nurses in Japan. Nurs Educ Today 2004; 24: 286-92.

11-   Chen J. Problem-based learning: Developing resilience in nursing students Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences 2011; 27: 230-3.

12-   Spencer C. Critical thinking in nursing: Teaching to diverse groups. Teach Learn Nurs 2008; 3: 87-9.

13-  Edwards SH. Critical thinking: A two-phase framework. Nurs Educ Pract 2007; 7: 303-14.

14-   Klunklin A, Subpaiboongid P, Keitlertnapha P. Viseskul N, Turale S. Thai nursing students’ adaption to problem-based learning: A qualitative study. Nurs Educ Pract 2011; 11: 370-4.

15-   Baker CM, Pesut DG, McDaniel AM, Fisher ML. Evaluating the impact of problem –based learning on learning styles of master's students in nursing administration. J Prof Nurs 2007; 23(4): 214-19.

16-   Yuan H, Kunaviktikul W, Klunklin A. Williams B. Improvement of nursing students’ critical thinking skills through problem-based learning in the people’s Republic of China: A quasi-experimental study. Nurs Health Sci 2008; 10: 70-6.

17-   Ozturk C, Karayagiz Muslu G, Dicle A. A comparison of problem-based and traditional education on nursing students’ critical thinking dispositions. Nurs Educ Today 2008; 28: 627–32.

18-   Tseng HC, Chou FH, Wang HH, Ko HH, Jian SY, Weng WC. The effectiveness of problem-based learning and concept mapping among Taiwanese registered nursing students. Nurs Educ Today 2011; 31: 41-6.

19-   Ehrenberg CA, Haggblom M. Problem-based learning in clinical nursing education: Integrating theory and practice. 2007. Nurse Education in Practice 2007; 7:67-74

20-  Worrell JA, Profetto-McGrath J. Critical thinking as an outcome of context-based learning among post RN students: A literature review. Nurs Educ Today 2007; 27:420-6.

21-  Oja KJ. Using problem-based learning in the clinical setting to improve nursing students' critical thinking: an evidence review. 2011; 50(3): 145-51.

22-    Yang YC, Newby TJ, Bill RL. Using socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education 2005; 19(3): 163-81.

23-   Wheeler L, Collins S. The influence of concept mapping on critical thinking in baccalaureate nursing students. J Prof Nurs 2003; 19(6): 339-46.

24-    Akhoundzadeh K, Ahmari-Tehran H, Salehi S, Abedini Z. Critical thinking in nursing education in Iran. Iran J Med Educ 2011; 11(3): 210-21.

25-  Jamshidian ghale-sefidi T, Khomojani-farahani A. The relationship between language, gender, age and level of critical thinking. Foreign Language Stud 2009; 55: 71-81.

26-  Hosseini MH, Karimi K, Abbasi L, Zahednezhad H. The effect of an active educational method on critical thinking of nursing students in Lorestan University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ 2014; 14(5): 403-10.

27-   Barrow Elizabeth J, Lyte Geraldine, Butterworth Tony. An evaluation of problem-based learning in a nursing theory and practice module. Nurs Educ Prac 2002; 2(1): 55–62.

28-   Aari AR, Elomaa L, Ylonen M, Saarikoski M. Problem-based learning in clinical practice: Employment and education as development partners. Nurs Educ Pract 2008; 8: 420–27.

29-   Tiwari A, Chan S, Wong E, Wong D, Chui C, Wong A, et al. The effect of problem-based learning on students’ approaches to learning in the context of clinical nursing education. Nurs Educ Today 2006; 26: 430-8.

30-   Panjehpour M, Ataei N. Comparison the effectiveness of Problem Based Learning with Lecture-Based Method in teaching metabolic biochemistry. Iran J Med Educ 2012; 11(9): 1318-25.

31-   Chou F, Chin C. Experience of problem-based learning in nursing education at Kaohsiung Medical University. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2009; 25(5): 58-63.