The Effect of "Standardized and Real Patient Interviews" on Students' Self-Confidence and Self-Efficacy Levels in Nursing Process Education

NCT07098442 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: AkdUni
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 83
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The research is a single-center, single-blind (participant), pretest-posttest control group randomized controlled study conducted to determine the effect of meeting with a "standard and real patient" on students' self-confidence and self-efficacy levels in the teaching of the nursing process.

Conditions

Nursing Student

Keywords

Nursing Education; Nursing Process; Clinical Education

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Self-efficacy

  General Self-Efficacy Scale: The scale consists of 17 items and three subscales: "initiation," "perseverance," and "effort-persistence." The measurement tool includes 11 reverse-scored items (2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, and 17). The total score on the Likert-type scale ranges from 17 to 85. A higher total score indicates a higher self-efficacy belief.

  It was applied at the first interview with the patient after randomization and immediately after the last interview. (The period between the first interview before going to the clinic and the last interview after clinical application is 3 months).

• Self confidence

  The Self-Confidence Scale was used to determine students' self-confidence levels. The total score obtained from the 33-item, 5-point Likert-type scale ranges from 33 to 165. The individual's self-confidence level is calculated by dividing the total score by the number of items (33). A score below 2.5 indicates low self-confidence, a score between 2.5 and 3.5 indicates moderate self-confidence, and a score above 3.5 indicates high self-confidence.

  It was applied at the first interview with the patient after randomization and immediately after the last interview. (The period between the first interview before going to the clinic and the last interview after clinical application is 3 months).

Study Arms (3)

Online Standart Patient

EXPERIMENTAL

Behavioral: Online Interview Group

Clinical Real Patient

EXPERIMENTAL

Behavioral: Clinical Real Patient Group

Control Group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Behavioral: Control Group

Interventions

Control Group BEHAVIORAL

On the first clinical day, students had a 30-45 minute meeting with the patient they were responsible for, which included the instructor.

Control Group

Online Interview Group BEHAVIORAL

Before the Interview * Preliminary briefings were given by providing a scenario for the standard patient to be interviewed. * Students were given the "Interview Guide," "Nursing Process Case Example," and "Tips for Conducting a Successful Interview" documents and were asked to read them before the interview. Interview • Students conducted a 30-45 minute interview with a pre-determined standard patient. After the Interview * The instructor, who monitored the interview, debriefed the students. * On the first clinical day after the intervention, students conducted a 30-45 minute interview with the patient they were responsible for, which included the instructor.

Online Standart Patient

Clinical Real Patient Group BEHAVIORAL

Before the Interview * Patients who were willing to be interviewed in the clinic, stable, and physically and psychologically competent were selected, and the faculty member who would monitor the interview provided preliminary information about the interview. * Students were provided with the "Interview Guide," "Nursing Process Case Example," and "Tips for Conducting a Successful Interview" documents and were asked to read them before the interview. Interview • Students conducted a 30-45 minute interview with a real patient in the pre-determined clinic. After the Interview * The faculty member who monitored the interview debriefed the students. * On the first clinical day after the intervention, students had a 30-45 minute interview with the patient for whom they were responsible, which included the faculty member.

Clinical Real Patient

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• No prior experience in clinical practice
• Taking the Fundamentals of Nursing course for the first time,
• Attending the theoretical explanation of the Nursing Process within the Fundamentals of Nursing course and the history-taking skills demonstration given by the instructor.

You may not qualify if:

• Refusing to participate in the study

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Akdeniz University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Nursing Faculty

Antalya, 07070, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Related Publications (7)

• Wilson RD, Klein JD, Hagler D. Computer-based or human patient simulation-based case analysis: which works better for teaching diagnostic reasoning skills? Nurs Educ Perspect. 2014 Jan-Feb;35(1):14-8. doi: 10.5480/11-515.1.

  PMID: 24716336 BACKGROUND

• Olaussen C, Heggdal K, Tvedt CR. Elements in scenario-based simulation associated with nursing students' self-confidence and satisfaction: A cross-sectional study. Nurs Open. 2019 Sep 27;7(1):170-179. doi: 10.1002/nop2.375. eCollection 2020 Jan.

  PMID: 31871700 BACKGROUND

• Labrague LJ, McEnroe-Petitte DM, Bowling AM, Nwafor CE, Tsaras K. High-fidelity simulation and nursing students' anxiety and self-confidence: A systematic review. Nurs Forum. 2019 Jul;54(3):358-368. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12337. Epub 2019 Mar 10.

  PMID: 30852844 BACKGROUND

• Ozdemir NG, Kaya H. The effectiveness of high-fidelity simulation methods to gain Foley catheterization knowledge, skills, satisfaction and self-confidence among novice nursing students: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Educ Today. 2023 Nov;130:105952. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105952. Epub 2023 Aug 23.

  PMID: 37639878 BACKGROUND

• Sarmasoglu S, Dinc L, Elcin M. Using Standardized Patients in Nursing Education: Effects on Students' Psychomotor Skill Development. Nurse Educ. 2016 Mar-Apr;41(2):E1-5. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000188.

  PMID: 26102639 BACKGROUND

• Ordu Y, Caliskan N. The impact of a web-based mind map learning technique on students' nursing knowledge of the nursing process. Int J Nurs Knowl. 2023 Apr;34(2):108-115. doi: 10.1111/2047-3095.12374. Epub 2022 May 20.

  PMID: 35593697 BACKGROUND

• Johnson KV, Scott AL, Franks L. Impact of Standardized Patients on First Semester Nursing Students Self-Confidence, Satisfaction, and Communication in a Simulated Clinical Case. SAGE Open Nurs. 2020 Jun 10;6:2377960820930153. doi: 10.1177/2377960820930153. eCollection 2020 Jan-Dec.

  PMID: 33415284 BACKGROUND

Related Links

• Akın, A. (2016). Development and Psychometric Properties of Self-Confidence Scale. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education, 7(2).
• Yıldırım, F., \& İlhan, İ. Ö. (2010). Validity and reliability study of the Turkish form of the general self-efficacy scale. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 21(4), 301-308.

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Control Groups

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Epidemiologic Research Design; Epidemiologic Methods; Investigative Techniques; Research Design; Methods

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Res. Assist. Dr.

Model Details: The study designed as a single-blind randomized controlled trial.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: July 17, 2025
• First Posted: August 1, 2025
• Study Start: September 15, 2021
• Primary Completion: November 15, 2021
• Study Completion: January 30, 2022
• Last Updated: August 1, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-07

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

TU (1)