Exploring the impact of instructional approaches on the learning and transfer of medication dosage calculation competency.

Full Abstract

AIM: The ability of nurses to perform accurate drug dosage calculations has repercussions for patients' well-being. How best to assist nurses develop competency in this area is paramount. This paper presents findings of a study conducted with undergraduate nurses to determine the effect of three instructional approaches on the learning of this skill. METHOD: The quasi-experimental study exposed participants to one of three instructional approaches: integrative learning, computerised learning and a combination of integrative and computerised learning. Quantitative and qualitative approaches were used to explore differences in the instructional approaches and gain further understanding of the learning process. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the three instructional approaches on knowledge acquisition and transfer measures, other than measures for procedural knowledge, which was significant (F(2,47) = 3.33 at p < .044). A least-significant difference post hoc test (alpha = 0. 10) indicated computerised learning was significantly more effective in developing procedural knowledge. CONCLUSION: The provision of instructional strategies, which facilitate development of conditional knowledge and automaticity, is necessary for competency development in dosage calculations. Furthermore, the curriculum must incorporate authentic tasks and permit time to support competency attainment.

Author information

Author/s: Glaister, Karen (K);

Affiliation: Postgraduate Diabetes Programs, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia.

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Comparative Study; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal: Contemporary nurse : a journal for the Australian nursing profession (Contemp Nurse), published in Australia. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2005-Sep; vol 20 (issue 1) : pp 3-13

Dates: Created 2005/11/18; Completed 2006/02/07; Revised 2006/11/15;

PMID: 16295337, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 2/18/2009, IMS Date: )

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article
(including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.