Case Study Scenarios: Integrating QSEN Competency Responses Presented by: Lori Sprenger, PhD, RN.

Case Study Scenarios: Integrating QSEN

Competency Responses Presented by: Lori Sprenger, PhD, RN

OBJECTIVES The participant will:

1. Recognize the importance of integrating QSEN competencies into case study (CS) scenarios that may be used in a variety of nursing education settings.

2. Understand the process for implementing CS with QSEN integration into a variety of nursing education settings.

3. Critique the effectiveness of implementing CS with QSEN integration into a variety of nursing education settings.

Objective 1: Recognize the importance of integrating QSEN competencies into case study (CS) scenarios that may be used in a variety of nursing education settings.

QSEN Purpose (QSEN Institute, 2005-2014)

Increase patient safety Increase overall prevalence of quality patient-

care outcomes

Goals of QSEN intervention strategy is to enable nursing students to…1. Understand the importance of QSEN 2. Feel empowered and confident to apply QSEN

competencies to hypothetical and real patient-care situations in both the acute care and community care settings.

Objective 2: Implement CS w/QSEN integration into a variety of educational settings

Classroom setting Whole group discussion Small group discussion

Oral presentation Students create their own CS and QSEN

integration questions

Online course room setting Individual or group responses

Initial response to graded discussion area Peer responses to CS including QSEN

responses

Objective 2 (continued)

Clinical post-conference Individual patients (acute care or

community setting) F2F sharing of QSEN integration Online post conference sharing

Groups of patients in the community setting F2F sharing of QSEN integration Online post conference sharing

Objective 3: Critique the effectiveness of the intervention

Qualitative response from students Verbal or written responses to open-ended questions

Students’ overall general opinions about the CS w/ QSEN integration

What students liked best What students did not like Ask about students’ levels of confidence with applying

QSEN integration into CS scenarios What could be done to improve the CS w/ QSEN

integration strategy How did the CS w/QSEN competency integration

enhance your patient-care skills in the clinical setting?

Objective 3 (continued)

Quantitative Closed ended question with yes or no response

Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity on your own another time?

Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity as a small group activity another time?

Would you like to try the CS w/ QSEN integration activity as a classroom discussion another time?

Develop a Likert scale questionnaire regarding level of self-confidence (Shell, Murphy, & Bruning, 1989)

0 = poor level of confidence, 5 = average level of self-confidence, 10 highly self-confident My level of confidence with completing the CS w/QSEN integration alone is: My level of confidence with completing the CS w/QSEN integration in a small

group is: My level of confidence with completing the CS w/ QSEN integration in an open

discussion classroom setting is: Develop a Likert scale questionnaire about general overall opinion

0---did not like, 5---no opinion, 10---liked it a lot My overall general opinion of the CS w/ QSEN integration is:

Evaluation Tool

Evaluation tool (continued)

Evaluation tool (continued)

Open-ended response:

How did the case study (CS) with QSEN competency integration affect your patient-care interactions and patient-care outcomes in the clinical setting?

Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative

Helpful for participants

1. Increased critical thinking skills

2. Increased student confidence

3. Increased knowledge of pharm concepts

4. Overall, helpful in general

Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative (continued)

Helpful for patient care1. Increased patient education

2. Provided rationale and knowledge for patient care

3. Increased patient safety

4. Increased medication safety

5. Increased understanding of patient’s perspectives

6. Helped ensure patient’s involvement in care

7. Increased collaboration

8. Increased focus on QSEN integration

9. Increased focus on WPN (Whole Person Nursing) and patient-centered care

Results of Evaluation (N = 39): Qualitative (continued)

Non-helpful comments

1. Hard to relate QSEN to patient care due to lack of exposure

2. Did not apply QSEN to patient care

3. Did not enjoy doing CS w/QSEN integration

4. Time consuming to do CS w/QSEN integration

5. CS w/ QSEN integration were not helpful

Results of Evaluation (N = 37): Quantitative

Quantitative—Mean SE ALONE = 8.9189 SMALL GROUPS = 9.3514 CLASS DISCUSSION = 9.5000

--Mean are different, but not statistically different--Results not generalizable to a larger population

References

QSEN Institute. (2005-2014). Competencies. Retrieved from

http://qsen.org/competencies/

Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy

and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and

writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,

81(1), 91–100. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.1.91

Thank you!

What questions do you have?