临床护理带教中不同带教方式的效果比较

Effect Comparison of Different Teaching Methods in Clinical Nursing

目的探讨3种不同带教方式在临床护理带教中应用的效果。方法将2009年3-12月的实习护生198名按随机数字表法分为A(跟班次带教组)、B(一对一带教组)、C(医护结合带教组)3组,分别采用3种不同带教方式对3组护生进行临床护理带教,并于实习前、后对护生的操作技能、护理评估、专科理论、护理文书、护理查体等方面进行考核和组间比较。结果 3组护生实习后综合成绩得分均高于实习前,差异有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。实习前,3组护生各项目考核成绩经比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);实习后,专科理论、护理查体、护理评估考核成绩及综合成绩C组高于A组、B组(P<0.05);护理评估考核成绩及综合成绩B组高于A组(P<0.05),其他方面的考核成绩A组与B组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论医护结合的带教方式有利于促进护生工作能力的培养,值得推广与借鉴。

Objective To evaluate the effects of three different teaching methods in clinical nursing.Methods A total 198 nursing students from March to December 2009 were randomly divided into group A（regular shifts of nursing teaching group）,group B（one to one nursing teaching group） and group C（combined medical and nursing teaching group）.The nursing students in the three groups received three different clinical teaching methods separately.Comparisons were conducted on nursing assessment,specialist theory,instrument care,nursing and other aspects of examination assessment in the nursing students before and after nursing practice.Results The consolidated scores of the nursing students in the three groups were significantly higher after nursing practice than before（P0.05）.No significant difference was observed in the consolidated scores in the nursing students in the three groups before nursing practice（P0.05）.After nursing practice,the assessment and consolidated scores on specialist theory,nursing examination and nursing assessment were higher in group C than those of group A and group B（P0.05）.The assessment and consolidated scores in group B were higher than those in group A（P0.05）.No significant difference was observed on other aspects＇ assessments between group A and group B（P0.05）.Conclusion Different teaching methods of clinical nursing promotes nursing capicity and deserves further promotion in clinical practice.