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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nurse education today 2022-04, Vol.111, p.105299-105299, Article 105299
Hauptverfasser: Dutra, S.V.O., Kumar, K., Clochesy, J.M.
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; 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