Esra AKIN PALANDÖKEN, Derya UZELLİ YILMAZ, Sevil HAMARAT TUNCALI, Sinem ÇALIŞKAN

Development of a Mini-CEX tool in simulation and evaluation of the subcutaneous drug administration skills of senior nursing students before graduation: A Pilot Study

Aim: This study was conducted in order to development of a Mini-CEX tool based on the core competencies of nurses and evaluation of the subcutaneous drug administration skills of senior nursing students before graduation.Materials and Methods: A Mini-CEX tool was developed based on the core competencies of nurses. When opinion of the expert’s evaluation was confirmed, the students’ clinical competencies of the subcutaneous drug administration skills were evaluated simultaneously in standardized patient simulation with the Mini-CEX form (n=66).Results: The mean score for the whole mini-CEX was 6.13 ± 1.20 (range = 1â€‘9). The results of this research indicate the feasibility of using our Mini-CEX tool. The mean student satisfaction score was high at 4.59 ± 0.46 (range = 1â€‘5). 69.7% (n=46) of students thought that feedback is an important their professional development and 62.1% (n=41) of students thought that mini-CEX are an important educational tool.Conclusion: The results of this research indicate the feasibility of using our Mini-CEX tool. The study supports of the use of the Mini-CEX to assess clinical competence through simulation. The study recommends the use of applications that increase the level of realism such as the use of standardized patients or moulages in examinations which aim to simultaneously evaluate student skills such as communication and decision making.

PDF

___

1. Hinton JE, Mays MZ, Hagler D, et al. Testing nursing competence: Validity and reliability of the nursing performance profile. J Nurs Measure 2017;25;431-58.
2. Ulfvarson J, Oxelmark L. Developing an assessment tool for intended learning outcomes in clinical practice for nursing students. Nurs Educ Today 2012;32:703- 8.
3. Fukada M. Nursing competency: Definition, structure and development. Yonago Acta Medica 2018;61:1-7.
4. Alves de Lima A, Barrero C, Baratta S, et al. Validity, reliability, feasibility and satisfaction of the MiniClinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) for cardiology residency training. Med Teach 2007;29:785-90.
5. Ryall T, Judd BK, Gordon CJ. Simulation-based assessments in health professional education: A systematic review. J Multi Healthc 2016;22:69-82.
6. Norcini JJ, Blank LL, Arnold GK, et al. The miniCEX (clinical evaluation exercise): A preliminary investigation. Annals in Med 1995;123:795-9. 7.
7. Liu C. An introduction to workplace-based assessments. Gastro and Hepat Bed to Bench 2012;5:24-8 .
8. Hassan S. Faculty development: Mini-Cex as workplace-based assessment. Educ in Med J 2011;3: 32-43.
9. Kogan JR, Hauer KE. Brief report: Use of the miniclinical evaluation exercise in internal medicine core clerkships. J Gen Int Med 2003;21:501-2 .
10. Nair BR, Alexander HG, McGrath BP, at al. The mini clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) for assessing clinical performance of international medical graduates. Med J Australia 2008; 189: 159-161. 11.
11. Behere R. Introduction of Mini-CEX in undergraduate dental education in India. Educ for Health 2014;27:262-8.
12. Koyun A, Ocalan D. Evaluation of pregnant examination simulation with Mini-CEX in nursing education: An experience of Turkey. Clin Exp Med Sci 2016;4:13-23.
13. Sweet LP, Glover P, McPhee T. The midwifery miniCEX–A valuable clinical assessment tool for midwifery education. Nurs Educ Practice 2013;13: 147-53.
14. Lörwald AC, Lahner FM, Nouns ZM, et al. The educational impact of Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) and Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) and its association with implementation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS One 2018; 13: e0198009.
15. Wilkinson JR, Crossley JG, Wragg A, et al. Implementing workplace-based assessment across the medical specialties in the United Kingdom. Med Educ 2008;42:364-73.
16. Milner KA, Watson SM, Stewart JG, et al. Use of MiniCEX tool to assess clinical competence in family nurse practitioner students using undergraduate students as patients and doctoral students as evaluators. J Nurs Educ 2014;53:719-20.
17. Sendir M, Buyukyilmaz F, Celik Z, et al. Comparison of 3 methods to prevent pain and bruising after subcutaneous heparin administration. Clin Nurs Special 2015;29:174-80.
18. Hunter J. Subcutaneous injection technique. Nurs Standard 2008;22:41-4.
19. Grassi G, Scuntero P, Trepiccioni R, et al. Optimizing insulin injection technique and its effect on blood glucose control. J Clin Trans Endoc 2014;1:145-50.
20. Grandell-Niemi H, Hupli M, Leino-Kilpi H, et al. Finnish nurses’ and nursing students’ pharmacological skills. J Clin Nurs 2005;14:685-94.
21. National Core Education Program in Nursing. Retrieved from; http://www.hemed.org.tr/images/dosya-yukle/ HUCEP-2014-PDF.pdf.
22. Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Does scale length matter? A comparison of nine versus five-point rating scales for the Mini-CEX. Advan Healt Sci Educ2009;14:655-60.
23. McGaghie WC, Siddall VJ, Mazmanian PE. Lessons for continuing medical education from simulation research in undergraduate and graduate medical education: effectiveness of continuing medical education: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Educational Guidelines. Chest 2009;135:62-8.
24. Hernandez C, Mermelstein R, Robinson, et al. Assessing students’ ability to detect melanomas using standardized patients and moulage. J American Acad Dermatol 2013;68:83-8.
25. Wanat KA, Kist J, Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, et al. Improving students’ ability to perform skin examinations and detect cutaneous malignancies using standardized patients and moulage. J American Acad Dermatol 2013;69:816-17.
26. Zorn J, Snyder J, Guthrie J. Use of moulage to evaluate student assessment of skin in an objective structured clinical examination. J Physic Assist Educ 2018;29:99-103.
27. Decker S, Fey M, Sideras S, et al. Standards of best practice: Simulation standard VI: The debriefing process. Clin Sim Nurs 2013;9:26-9.
28. Tella S, Liukka M, Jamookeeah D, et al. What do nurse students learn about patient safety? An integrative literature reviews. J Nurs Educ 2013;53:7-13.
29. Oner HA, Ustun B. Professionalism: Concept Analyse. Dokuz Eylul Nurs Elect J 2014;7:151-5.
30. Dikmen Y, Karatas H, Arslan GG. The level of professionalism of nurses working in a hospital in Turkey. J of Car Sci 2016;5:95-102.
31. Kelly S, Courts N. The professional self-concept of new graduate nurses. Nurs Educ Pract 2007;7:332-7.
32. Lin YH, Wang LS. A Chinese version of the revised nurses’ professional values scale: Reliability and validity assessment. Nurs Educ Today 2010;30:492-8.
33. Cerit B, Temelli G. Examination of professional behaviors according to the gender and grade level in nursing students. J Health Nurs Manage 2018;5:164- 171.
34. Sen H. Guide principles of psychomotor skills teaching in nursing: Sample of chest compression. Dokuz Eylül Nurs Elect J 2012;5:180-4.
35. Ozden D, Ozveren H, Gulnar E. Nurse students’ clinical decision-making abilities level and the factors that affect abilities. Dokuz Eylül Nurs Elect J 2018;11: 41- 47.