Search

Purpose To explore nursing students' perceptions of their clinical learning experiences in the mental health (MH) setting. Design and methods Secondary analysis of data collected within an Italian national cross-sectional study involving students (N = 9607) who were attending 95 3-year baccalaureate nursing programs. Findings Students in MH settings scored the quality of the learning environment overall significantly higher (P = .008) compared to those who rotated in other clinical settings, specifically with respect to (a) the tutorial strategies' quality; (b) the learning opportunities; and (c) the learning environment's quality. Practice implications MH settings emerged as a worthy clinical environment where less pressing rhythms allow preceptors to provide students more learning opportunities that, in turn, affect the perceived degree of competence achieved and the desire to work in these contexts after graduation.

Effective performance of clinical handovers should be one of the priorities of nursing education to promote efficient communication skills and ensure patient safety. However, to date, no studies have explored to what extent nursing students are involved in handovers.To explore nursing students' handover involvement during their clinical rotations and associated factors.This was a secondary analysis of a large national cross-sectional study that involved 9607 undergraduate nursing students in 27 universities across 95 three-year Italian baccalaureate nursing programs. The involvement in the clinical handovers was the end point (from 0, never, to 3, always). A path analysis was performed to identify variables directly and indirectly affecting students' handover involvement.Handover involvement was reported as 'only a little', 'to some extent', and 'always' by 1739 (18.1%), 2939 (30.6%), and 4180 (43.5%) students, respectively; only 749 (7.8%) of students reported never being involved. At the path analysis explaining the 19.1% of variance of nursing students' involvement, some variables emerged that directly increased the likelihood of being involved in handovers. These were being female (β = 0.115, p 0.001); having children (β = 0.107, p = 0.011); being a 3rd-year student (β = 0.142, p 0.001) and being a 2nd-year student as compared to a 1st-year student (β = 0.050, p = 0.036); and having a longer clinical rotation (β = 0.015, p 0.001) in units with high 'quality of the learning environment' (β = 0.279, p 0.001). Moreover, students who were supervised by the nurse teacher (β = -0.279, p 0.001), or by a nurse on a daily basis (β = -0.253, p = 0.004), or by the staff (β = -0.190, p 0.001) reported being less involved in handovers as compared to those students supervised by a clinical nurse. Variables with indirect effects also emerged (model of student's supervision adopted at the unit level, and number of previous clinical rotations attended by students). Moreover, handover involvement explained 11.5% of students self-reported degree of competences learned during the clinical experience.Limiting students' opportunity to be involved in handover can prevent the development of communication skills and the professional socialization processes. Strategies at different levels are needed to promote handover among undergraduate nursing students.

Background: Undergraduate nursing students have been documented to experience ethical distress during their clinical training and felt poorly supported in discussing the ethical issues they encountered. Research aims: This study was aimed at exploring nursing students’ perceived opportunity to discuss ethical issues that emerged during their clinical learning experience and associated factors. Research design: An Italian national cross-sectional study design was performed in 2015–2016. Participants were invited to answer a questionnaire composed of four sections regarding: (1) socio-demographic data, (2) previous clinical learning experiences, (3) current clinical learning experience quality and outcomes, and (4) the opportunity to discuss ethical issues with nurses in the last clinical learning experience (from 0 – ‘never’ to 3 – ‘very much’). Participants and research context: Participants were 9607 undergraduate nursing students who were attending 95 different three-year Italian baccalaureate nursing programmes, located at 27 universities in 15 Italian regions. Ethical considerations: This study was conducted in accordance with the Human Subject Research Ethics Committee guidelines after the research protocol was approved by an ethics committee. Findings: Overall, 4707 (49%) perceived to have discussed ethical issues ‘much’ or ‘very much’; among the remaining, 3683 (38.3%) and 1217 (12.7%) students reported the perception of having discussed, respectively, ‘enough’ or ‘never’ ethical issues emerged in the clinical practice. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis explaining 38.1% of the overall variance, the factors promoting ethical discussion were mainly set at the clinical learning environment levels (i.e. increased learning opportunities, self-directed learning, safety and nursing care quality, quality of the tutorial strategies, competences learned and supervision by a clinical nurse). In contrast, being male was associated with a perception of less opportunity to discuss ethical issues. Conclusion: Nursing faculties should assess the clinical environment prerequisites of the settings as a context of student experience before deciding on their accreditation. Moreover, the nursing faculty and nurse managers should also enhance competence with regard to discussing ethical issues with students among clinical nurses by identifying factors that hinder this learning opportunity in daily practice.

Context Error reporting is considered one of the most important mediating factors for patient safety (PS). However, reporting errors can be challenging for health care students. Objectives The aims of the study were: (i) to describe nursing students' opportunity to report errors, near misses or PS issues that emerged during their clinical learning experience; and (ii) to explore associated factors of the process of reporting itself. Methods A national survey was conducted on 9607 (91.7%) undergraduate nursing students. The endpoint was to have reported PS issues in the last clinical learning experience (from 0 'never' to 3 'always'). Explanatory variables were set individual, nursing programme and regional levels. Results A total of 4004 (41.7%) nursing students reported PS issues from 'never/rarely' to 'sometimes'. In the multi-level analysis, factors increasing the likelihood of reporting events affecting PS have been mainly at the nursing programme level: specifically, higher learning opportunities (odds ratio [OR] = 3.040; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.667-3.466), self-directed learning opportunities (OR = 1.491; 95% CI, 1.364-1.630), safety and nursing care quality (OR = 1.411; 95% CI, 1.250-1.594) and quality of tutorial strategies OR = 1.251; 95% CI, 1.113-1.406). By contrast, being supervised by a nurse teacher (OR = 0.523; 95% CI, 0.359-0.761) prevented the disclosure of PS issues compared with being supervised by a clinical nurse. Students attending their nursing programmes in some Italian regions showed a higher likelihood (OR from 1.346 to 2.938) of reporting PS issues compared with those undertaking their education in other regions. Conclusions Nursing students continue to be reticent to report PS issues. Given that they represent the largest generation of future health care workers, their education regarding PS should be continuously monitored and improved; moreover, strategies aimed at developing a non-blaming culture should be designed and implemented both at the clinical learning setting and regional levels.

The Clinical Learning Quality Evaluation Index for nursing students.The Italian nursing programs, the need to introduce tools evaluating the quality of the clinical learning as perceived by nursing students. Several tools already exist, however, several limitations suggesting the need to develop a new tool.A national project aimed at developing and validating a new instrument capable of measuring the clinical learning quality as experience by nursing students.A validation study design was undertaken from 2015 to 2016. All nursing national programs (n=43) were invited to participate by including all nursing students attending regularly their clinical learning. The tool developed based upon a) literature, b) validated tools already established among other healthcare professionals, and c) consensus expressed by experts and nursing students, was administered to the eligible students.9606 nursing in 27 universities (62.8%) participated. The psychometric properties of the new instrument ranged from good to excellent. According to the findings, the tool consists in 22 items and five factors: a) quality of the tutorial strategies, b) learning opportunities; c) safety and nursing care quality; d) self-direct learning; e) quality of the learning environment.The tool is already used. Its systematic adoption may support comparison among settings and across different programs; moreover, the tool may also support in accrediting new settings as well as in measuring the effects of strategies aimed at improving the quality of the clinical learning.