Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature
Medication errors and unsafe medication practices are a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm worldwide. The aim of this review was to (i) explore and identify evidence-based strategies to teach medication calculation skills by determining the most common errors and assess the quality, level, a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Nurse education today 2022-04, Vol.111, p.105299-105299, Article 105299 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 105299 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 105299 |
container_title | Nurse education today |
container_volume | 111 |
creator | Dutra, S.V.O. Kumar, K. Clochesy, J.M. |
description | Medication errors and unsafe medication practices are a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm worldwide.
The aim of this review was to (i) explore and identify evidence-based strategies to teach medication calculation skills by determining the most common errors and assess the quality, level, and role of the evidence, and (ii) describe instruction strategies for drug calculation skills development or improvement based on seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
Systematic review.
CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO.
The review followed Whittemore and Knafl's framework steps with an assessment of the studies reporting using PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ and categorizing their methods by evidence hierarchy and roles. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data.
From the total 1793 articles, 51 studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies included 9210 nursing students/nurses and mainly used a quantitative approach (67.5%), followed by qualitative (22.5%) and mixed methods (10.0%), with the students/nurses doing arithmetic and conceptual mistakes. The findings presented were low levels of evidence III (23.5%) and V (41.2%), quality Level B (82.4%), and 47.1% focused on choosing the appropriate teaching and intervention approaches (role of the evidence). The teaching strategies addressed multiple smart teaching principles, but mainly prior knowledge (principle 1, 39.2%). The least used strategies were those addressing the levers that influence motivation and behaviors such as value, expectations, and environment climate (principle 3, 13.7%). Two studies addressed five principles simultaneously.
Regarding teaching strategies, the most recurring strategies were early diagnostic assessments on knowledge, anxiety and/or self-confidence, considering knowledge organization with scaffolding complex tasks, being explicit about objectives and expectations, and usage of e-learning. However, e-learning was mainly used after 2018. Considering the low levels and quality of evidence, we recommend higher levels of research design for future research. Randomized Controlled Trials could be conducted when randomizing teaching methods per semester or questions embedded in software. Web-base software could be used to support teaching and research approaches. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105299 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2634846361</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0260691722000351</els_id><sourcerecordid>2634846361</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-3286ad5177503baeda239ae59e4f00c01820ecf8fbe5222ed55e8b9530b118a83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMoun78AQ8S8OKlazLZtKl4EfELFrzowVNI06lm7baapMr-e7NUPXjwlDDzzMvLQ8ghZ1POeH66mHZYxykwgDSQUJYbZMKlgAyKUmySCYOcZXnJix2yG8KCMaYKENtkR0gAxbiakKe7LkQ_2Oj6jqafifjsMNCm97T2wzO1prVDa8b9q2vbcEYvaFiFiMs0tdTjh8NP2jc0viBtXcQUMnjcJ1uNaQMefL975PH66uHyNpvf39xdXswzOwMVMwEqN7XkRSGZqAzWBkRpUJY4axizqSQwtI1qKkylAWspUVWlFKziXBkl9sjJmPvm-_cBQ9RLFyy2remwH4KGXMzULBc5T-jxH3TRD75L7RJVAhQFqDUFI2V9H4LHRr95tzR-pTnTa_F6odfi9Vq8HsWno6Pv6KFaYv178mM6AecjgMlFMuZ1sA47i7XzaKOue_df_hccmpQq</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2692277281</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Dutra, S.V.O. ; Kumar, K. ; Clochesy, J.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Dutra, S.V.O. ; Kumar, K. ; Clochesy, J.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Medication errors and unsafe medication practices are a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm worldwide.
The aim of this review was to (i) explore and identify evidence-based strategies to teach medication calculation skills by determining the most common errors and assess the quality, level, and role of the evidence, and (ii) describe instruction strategies for drug calculation skills development or improvement based on seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
Systematic review.
CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO.
The review followed Whittemore and Knafl's framework steps with an assessment of the studies reporting using PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ and categorizing their methods by evidence hierarchy and roles. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data.
From the total 1793 articles, 51 studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies included 9210 nursing students/nurses and mainly used a quantitative approach (67.5%), followed by qualitative (22.5%) and mixed methods (10.0%), with the students/nurses doing arithmetic and conceptual mistakes. The findings presented were low levels of evidence III (23.5%) and V (41.2%), quality Level B (82.4%), and 47.1% focused on choosing the appropriate teaching and intervention approaches (role of the evidence). The teaching strategies addressed multiple smart teaching principles, but mainly prior knowledge (principle 1, 39.2%). The least used strategies were those addressing the levers that influence motivation and behaviors such as value, expectations, and environment climate (principle 3, 13.7%). Two studies addressed five principles simultaneously.
Regarding teaching strategies, the most recurring strategies were early diagnostic assessments on knowledge, anxiety and/or self-confidence, considering knowledge organization with scaffolding complex tasks, being explicit about objectives and expectations, and usage of e-learning. However, e-learning was mainly used after 2018. Considering the low levels and quality of evidence, we recommend higher levels of research design for future research. Randomized Controlled Trials could be conducted when randomizing teaching methods per semester or questions embedded in software. Web-base software could be used to support teaching and research approaches.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0260-6917</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2793</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105299</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35228018</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Scotland: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>"education" ; "Students" ; and "drug dosage calculations" ; Arithmetic ; Clinical trials ; Complex tasks ; Computation ; Confidence ; Critical incidents ; Distance learning ; Dosage ; Drug Dosage Calculations ; Drug dosages ; Drugs ; Educational Strategies ; Electronic Learning ; Eligibility ; Errors ; Evidence ; Humans ; Injuries ; Internet ; Learning ; Literature reviews ; Mathematics ; Medication Errors - prevention & control ; Motivation ; Nurses ; Nursing ; Nursing education ; Online instruction ; Patient safety ; Pedagogy ; Principles ; Prior knowledge ; Prior Learning ; Randomized Controlled Trials ; Research Design ; Research Methodology ; SafeMedicate ; Skill development ; Software ; Students, Nursing ; Systematic review ; Teaching ; Teaching methods ; Unsafe</subject><ispartof>Nurse education today, 2022-04, Vol.111, p.105299-105299, Article 105299</ispartof><rights>2022 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Apr 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-3286ad5177503baeda239ae59e4f00c01820ecf8fbe5222ed55e8b9530b118a83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-3286ad5177503baeda239ae59e4f00c01820ecf8fbe5222ed55e8b9530b118a83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105299$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,30999,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35228018$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dutra, S.V.O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clochesy, J.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature</title><title>Nurse education today</title><addtitle>Nurse Educ Today</addtitle><description>Medication errors and unsafe medication practices are a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm worldwide.
The aim of this review was to (i) explore and identify evidence-based strategies to teach medication calculation skills by determining the most common errors and assess the quality, level, and role of the evidence, and (ii) describe instruction strategies for drug calculation skills development or improvement based on seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
Systematic review.
CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO.
The review followed Whittemore and Knafl's framework steps with an assessment of the studies reporting using PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ and categorizing their methods by evidence hierarchy and roles. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data.
From the total 1793 articles, 51 studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies included 9210 nursing students/nurses and mainly used a quantitative approach (67.5%), followed by qualitative (22.5%) and mixed methods (10.0%), with the students/nurses doing arithmetic and conceptual mistakes. The findings presented were low levels of evidence III (23.5%) and V (41.2%), quality Level B (82.4%), and 47.1% focused on choosing the appropriate teaching and intervention approaches (role of the evidence). The teaching strategies addressed multiple smart teaching principles, but mainly prior knowledge (principle 1, 39.2%). The least used strategies were those addressing the levers that influence motivation and behaviors such as value, expectations, and environment climate (principle 3, 13.7%). Two studies addressed five principles simultaneously.
Regarding teaching strategies, the most recurring strategies were early diagnostic assessments on knowledge, anxiety and/or self-confidence, considering knowledge organization with scaffolding complex tasks, being explicit about objectives and expectations, and usage of e-learning. However, e-learning was mainly used after 2018. Considering the low levels and quality of evidence, we recommend higher levels of research design for future research. Randomized Controlled Trials could be conducted when randomizing teaching methods per semester or questions embedded in software. Web-base software could be used to support teaching and research approaches.</description><subject>"education"</subject><subject>"Students"</subject><subject>and "drug dosage calculations"</subject><subject>Arithmetic</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Complex tasks</subject><subject>Computation</subject><subject>Confidence</subject><subject>Critical incidents</subject><subject>Distance learning</subject><subject>Dosage</subject><subject>Drug Dosage Calculations</subject><subject>Drug dosages</subject><subject>Drugs</subject><subject>Educational Strategies</subject><subject>Electronic Learning</subject><subject>Eligibility</subject><subject>Errors</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Injuries</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Mathematics</subject><subject>Medication Errors - prevention & control</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing</subject><subject>Nursing education</subject><subject>Online instruction</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>Pedagogy</subject><subject>Principles</subject><subject>Prior knowledge</subject><subject>Prior Learning</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Research Methodology</subject><subject>SafeMedicate</subject><subject>Skill development</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Students, Nursing</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teaching methods</subject><subject>Unsafe</subject><issn>0260-6917</issn><issn>1532-2793</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMoun78AQ8S8OKlazLZtKl4EfELFrzowVNI06lm7baapMr-e7NUPXjwlDDzzMvLQ8ghZ1POeH66mHZYxykwgDSQUJYbZMKlgAyKUmySCYOcZXnJix2yG8KCMaYKENtkR0gAxbiakKe7LkQ_2Oj6jqafifjsMNCm97T2wzO1prVDa8b9q2vbcEYvaFiFiMs0tdTjh8NP2jc0viBtXcQUMnjcJ1uNaQMefL975PH66uHyNpvf39xdXswzOwMVMwEqN7XkRSGZqAzWBkRpUJY4axizqSQwtI1qKkylAWspUVWlFKziXBkl9sjJmPvm-_cBQ9RLFyy2remwH4KGXMzULBc5T-jxH3TRD75L7RJVAhQFqDUFI2V9H4LHRr95tzR-pTnTa_F6odfi9Vq8HsWno6Pv6KFaYv178mM6AecjgMlFMuZ1sA47i7XzaKOue_df_hccmpQq</recordid><startdate>202204</startdate><enddate>202204</enddate><creator>Dutra, S.V.O.</creator><creator>Kumar, K.</creator><creator>Clochesy, J.M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202204</creationdate><title>Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature</title><author>Dutra, S.V.O. ; Kumar, K. ; Clochesy, J.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-3286ad5177503baeda239ae59e4f00c01820ecf8fbe5222ed55e8b9530b118a83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>"education"</topic><topic>"Students"</topic><topic>and "drug dosage calculations"</topic><topic>Arithmetic</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Complex tasks</topic><topic>Computation</topic><topic>Confidence</topic><topic>Critical incidents</topic><topic>Distance learning</topic><topic>Dosage</topic><topic>Drug Dosage Calculations</topic><topic>Drug dosages</topic><topic>Drugs</topic><topic>Educational Strategies</topic><topic>Electronic Learning</topic><topic>Eligibility</topic><topic>Errors</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Injuries</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Mathematics</topic><topic>Medication Errors - prevention & control</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing</topic><topic>Nursing education</topic><topic>Online instruction</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>Pedagogy</topic><topic>Principles</topic><topic>Prior knowledge</topic><topic>Prior Learning</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Research Methodology</topic><topic>SafeMedicate</topic><topic>Skill development</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Students, Nursing</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teaching methods</topic><topic>Unsafe</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dutra, S.V.O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clochesy, J.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Nurse education today</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dutra, S.V.O.</au><au>Kumar, K.</au><au>Clochesy, J.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature</atitle><jtitle>Nurse education today</jtitle><addtitle>Nurse Educ Today</addtitle><date>2022-04</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>111</volume><spage>105299</spage><epage>105299</epage><pages>105299-105299</pages><artnum>105299</artnum><issn>0260-6917</issn><eissn>1532-2793</eissn><abstract>Medication errors and unsafe medication practices are a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm worldwide.
The aim of this review was to (i) explore and identify evidence-based strategies to teach medication calculation skills by determining the most common errors and assess the quality, level, and role of the evidence, and (ii) describe instruction strategies for drug calculation skills development or improvement based on seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
Systematic review.
CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO.
The review followed Whittemore and Knafl's framework steps with an assessment of the studies reporting using PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ and categorizing their methods by evidence hierarchy and roles. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data.
From the total 1793 articles, 51 studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies included 9210 nursing students/nurses and mainly used a quantitative approach (67.5%), followed by qualitative (22.5%) and mixed methods (10.0%), with the students/nurses doing arithmetic and conceptual mistakes. The findings presented were low levels of evidence III (23.5%) and V (41.2%), quality Level B (82.4%), and 47.1% focused on choosing the appropriate teaching and intervention approaches (role of the evidence). The teaching strategies addressed multiple smart teaching principles, but mainly prior knowledge (principle 1, 39.2%). The least used strategies were those addressing the levers that influence motivation and behaviors such as value, expectations, and environment climate (principle 3, 13.7%). Two studies addressed five principles simultaneously.
Regarding teaching strategies, the most recurring strategies were early diagnostic assessments on knowledge, anxiety and/or self-confidence, considering knowledge organization with scaffolding complex tasks, being explicit about objectives and expectations, and usage of e-learning. However, e-learning was mainly used after 2018. Considering the low levels and quality of evidence, we recommend higher levels of research design for future research. Randomized Controlled Trials could be conducted when randomizing teaching methods per semester or questions embedded in software. Web-base software could be used to support teaching and research approaches.</abstract><cop>Scotland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>35228018</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105299</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0260-6917 |
ispartof | Nurse education today, 2022-04, Vol.111, p.105299-105299, Article 105299 |
issn | 0260-6917 1532-2793 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2634846361 |
source | MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | "education" "Students" and "drug dosage calculations" Arithmetic Clinical trials Complex tasks Computation Confidence Critical incidents Distance learning Dosage Drug Dosage Calculations Drug dosages Drugs Educational Strategies Electronic Learning Eligibility Errors Evidence Humans Injuries Internet Learning Literature reviews Mathematics Medication Errors - prevention & control Motivation Nurses Nursing Nursing education Online instruction Patient safety Pedagogy Principles Prior knowledge Prior Learning Randomized Controlled Trials Research Design Research Methodology SafeMedicate Skill development Software Students, Nursing Systematic review Teaching Teaching methods Unsafe |
title | Instruction strategies for drug calculation skills: A systematic review of the literature |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T16%3A23%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Instruction%20strategies%20for%20drug%20calculation%20skills:%20A%20systematic%20review%20of%20the%20literature&rft.jtitle=Nurse%20education%20today&rft.au=Dutra,%20S.V.O.&rft.date=2022-04&rft.volume=111&rft.spage=105299&rft.epage=105299&rft.pages=105299-105299&rft.artnum=105299&rft.issn=0260-6917&rft.eissn=1532-2793&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105299&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2634846361%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2692277281&rft_id=info:pmid/35228018&rft_els_id=S0260691722000351&rfr_iscdi=true |