A systematic review protocol on the use of online learning and blended learning for teaching clinical skills to undergraduate health professional students

Aim: This paper is a review protocol that will be used to identify, critically appraise and synthesize the best current evidence relating to the use of online learning and blended learning approaches in teaching clinical skills in undergraduate nursing.

Background: Although previous systematic reviews on online learning versus face to face learning have been undertaken (Cavanaugh et al. 2010, Cook et al. 2010), a systematic review on the impact of online learning and blended learning for teaching clinical skills has yet to be considered in undergraduate nursing. By reviewing nursing students’ online learning experiences, systems can potentially be designed to ensure all students’ are supported appropriately to meet their learning needs.

Methods/Design: The key objectives of the review are to evaluate how online-learning teaching strategies assist nursing students learn; to evaluate the students satisfaction with this form of teaching; to explore the variety of online-learning strategies used; to determine what online-learning strategies are more effective and to determine if supplementary face to face instruction enhances learning. A search of the following databases will be made MEDLINE, CINAHL, BREI, ERIC and AUEI. This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative research.

Conclusion: This review intends to report on a combination of student experience and learning outcomes therefore increasing its utility for educators and curriculum developers involved in healthcare education.

What Are the Effects of Teaching Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC)? Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background

An evidence-based approach to health care is recognized internationally as a key competency for healthcare practitioners. This overview systematically evaluated and organized evidence from systematic reviews on teaching evidence-based health care (EBHC).

Methods/Findings

We searched for systematic reviews evaluating interventions for teaching EBHC to health professionals compared to no intervention or different strategies. Outcomes covered EBHC knowledge, skills, attitudes, practices and health outcomes. Comprehensive searches were conducted in April 2013. Two reviewers independently selected eligible reviews, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We included 16 systematic reviews, published between 1993 and 2013. There was considerable overlap across reviews. We found that 171 source studies included in the reviews related to 81 separate studies, of which 37 are in more than one review. Studies used various methodologies to evaluate educational interventions of varying content, format and duration in undergraduates, interns, residents and practicing health professionals. The evidence in the reviews showed that multifaceted, clinically integrated interventions, with assessment, led to improvements in knowledge, skills and attitudes. Interventions improved critical appraisal skills and integration of results into decisions, and improved knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour amongst practicing health professionals. Considering single interventions, EBHC knowledge and attitude were similar for lecture-based versus online teaching. Journal clubs appeared to increase clinical epidemiology and biostatistics knowledge and reading behavior, but not appraisal skills. EBHC courses improved appraisal skills and knowledge. Amongst practicing health professionals, interactive online courses with guided critical appraisal showed significant increase in knowledge and appraisal skills. A short workshop using problem-based approaches, compared to no intervention, increased knowledge but not appraisal skills.

Conclusions

EBHC teaching and learning strategies should focus on implementing multifaceted, clinically integrated approaches with assessment. Future rigorous research should evaluate minimum components for multifaceted interventions, assessment of medium to long-term outcomes, and implementation of these interventions.