Educational intervention to improve critical thinking for undergraduate nursing students: A randomized clinical trial

• Published in: Nurse education in practice 2018-11, Vol.33, p.121-126
• Main Authors: Carbogim, Fábio da Costa, Barbosa, Amanda Conrado Silva, de Oliviera, Larissa Bertacchini, de Sá Diaz, Flávia Batísta Barbosa, Toledo, Luana Vieira, Alves, Katiusse Resende, Friedrich, Denise Barbosa de Castro, Luiz, Franciane Silva, Püschel, Vilanice Alves de Araújo
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Behavioral Objectives; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; Clinical Competence - standards; Clinical nursing; Clinical research; Clinical trial; Clinical trials; Control Groups; Critical thinking; Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate; Educational Measurement - standards; Educational programs; Evaluation methodology; Evidence-based nursing; Female; Humans; Hypotheses; Intervention; Learning Processes; Life sustaining treatment; Male; Metacognition; Nursing; Nursing education; Nursing skills; Nursing students; Problem based learning; Problem-Based Learning - methods; Students; Students, Nursing; Teaching methods; Thinking; Thinking skills; Undergraduate Students
• ISSN: 1471-5953; 1873-5223
• DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2018.10.001

The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Problem Based Learning (PBL) versus PBL associated with the Active Learning Model for Critical Thinking (ALMCT) to improve critical thinking (CT) in nursing students in an educational intervention on Basic Life Support (BLS). A two-arm randomized, single-blinded, parallel clinical trial was carried out with 108 Brazilian undergraduate nursing students who participated in a BLS course. PBL + ALMCT was used in the control group (CG), and PBL was used in the experimental group (EG). Pre- and post-tests were used to evaluate CT dispositions using the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI), and CT skills were evaluated using the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST). The results did not indicate significant differences between the CG and EG groups for total CCTDI and total CCTST scales and for most of their subscales. However, there was a significant difference in the EG when the mean scores on the pre- and post-test were compared on the CCTDI analyticity subscale (t = 2073; p = 0.043) and on the CCTST analysis subscale (t = 2302; p = 0.025). We strongly recommend further studies using PBL associated with ALMCT and randomized clinical trials that last more than one month. •Critical thinking contributes to assertiveness in clinical decision making.•ALMCT influences critical thinking improvement via analyticity disposition and analytical skill.•Self-report method tests that evaluate critical thinking should be interpreted with caution.