Clinical CompetenceMMSNCT06646068
Enhancing Clinical Judgment Competence in Nursing Education: A Mixed-Methods Study in the Philippines
A study testing Philips 66 with CBL in people with Clinical Competence and Nursing Education, run by Angeles University Foundation at 1 site in Philippines.
Trial summary
The goal of this mixed-methods study is to assess the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique integrated with case-based learning (CBL) on refining clinical judgment competence in senior nursing students in the Philippines. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 25 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Clinical Competence, Nursing Education
- What is being tested?
- Philips 66 with CBL
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePhilippines
- Study dates
- 12 Mar 2024to 29 May 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 25 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- BSN students enrolled in their fourth year at a Higher Education Institution in Angeles City, Philippines.
- At least 20 years old.
- Willing to participate in both pre- and post-intervention assessments.
Who cannot join
- Undergraduate nursing students who do not meet the criteria and refuse to join the study
- Students with anticipated absences exceeding a certain threshold (e.g., more than two sessions)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Philippines1 site
Angeles University Foundation, Mac Arthur Highway
Angeles City, Pampanga, 2009
About this study
Official title: Refining Clinical Judgment Competence in Nursing Education: The Impact of the Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique in Case-Based Learning
The goal of this mixed-methods study is to assess the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique integrated with case-based learning (CBL) on refining clinical judgment competence in senior nursing students in the Philippines.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Read more
Does the Philips 66 technique improve clinical judgment competence among nursing students more effectively than traditional CBL methods?
Participants will be senior nursing students, randomly assigned to an intervention group using the Philips 66-CBL and a control group using standard CBL. Clinical judgment competence will be evaluated through pre- and post-test assessments using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) and confidence questionnaires. A subset of participants from the intervention group will take part in focus group discussions to explore their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. Data will be collected over a short-term period for quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Read the detailed description
This study utilizes an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design to evaluate the effectiveness of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique, integrated with case-based learning (CBL), in enhancing clinical judgment competence among senior nursing students in the Philippines. The study consists of two phases: a quantitative experimental phase and a qualitative exploratory phase.
The quantitative phase adopts a true experimental pre-test/post-test design, involving 60 senior nursing students who will be randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=30) or the control group (n=30). The intervention group will undergo CBL sessions facilitated by the Philips 66 technique, while the control group will follow the standard CBL approach. The Philips 66 technique is a structured form of small group brainstorming where participants collaborate in smaller teams, fostering idea generation and peer learning in a timed setting. Clinical judgment competence will be assessed before and after the intervention using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR), which measures four dimensions of clinical judgment: noticing, interpreting, responding, and reflecting. Additionally, a researcher-designed questionnaire will be used to measure students' confidence levels in their clinical decision-making abilities.
The qualitative phase will involve focus group discussions (FGDs) with a subset of participants from the intervention group to gain deeper insights into their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. These discussions will aim to explore how the technique influences their critical thinking, decision-making, and collaborative learning processes. Thematic analysis will be applied to identify recurring themes and key experiences.
Statistical analysis for the quantitative component will include descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests (such as the Mann-Whitney U test), and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to analyze differences in clinical judgment competence and confidence levels between the two groups. For the qualitative component, data from FGDs will be analyzed thematically to provide contextual understanding and support for the quantitative findings.
The study aims to determine whether the integration of the Philips 66 technique with CBL can significantly enhance the development of clinical judgment competence in nursing students, preparing them for the challenges of real-world clinical settings. Future studies may be conducted across different contexts to validate the long-term effects of this intervention.
- Conditions
- Clinical Competence, Nursing Education
- Being tested
- Philips 66 with CBL
- Keywords
- Clinical Judgment Competence in Nursing
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Philips 66 with CBLOther
Also called Brainstorming Technique
Each team is given six minutes to brainstorm ideas or solutions to specific clinical cases. This technique is applied during case-based learning sessions to enhance clinical judgment and critical thinking skills among nursing students.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique Group (Intervention Group) | Other | Participants in this group will engage in the Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique as part of their case-based learning sessions. This structured method involves dividing participants into smaller groups of 6, with each group discussing a topic for 6 minutes, aimed at enhancing critical thinking and clinical judgment skills in nursing students. Receives: Other: Philips 66 with CBL |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Clinical Judgment Competence
The measure will assess the change in clinical judgment competence using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) pre-intervention and immediately post-intervention.
Measured: Assessment of clinical judgment competence will occur at baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) over a one-month period.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change in Teamwork and Collaborative Learning
This measure will evaluate the change in teamwork and collaborative learning as assessed through focus group interviews conducted immediately after the intervention.
Measured: Focus group interviews to assess teamwork and collaborative learning will be conducted immediately following the intervention, with each interview expected to last approximately 30-60 minutes.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Oct 2024
- Study start12 Mar 2024
- Primary completion15 May 2024
- Study completion29 May 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Clinical CompetenceStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Model description
- The study evaluated the effectiveness of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique integrated with case-based learning to enhance clinical judgment competence in nursing students. Using a true experimental pre-test/post-test design, 60 students were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. Both groups were exposed to the same clinical case scenarios, but the intervention group participated in Philips 66 sessions. The process included individual reflection (6 minutes) on clinical judgment and disaster triage protocols, followed by 6-minute group brainstorming sessions to collaboratively refine ideas. Group leaders then presented their nursing care plans within a 6-minute timeframe. The model aimed to foster critical thinking, collaboration, and clinical decision-making skills. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) was used for evaluation.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Angeles University Foundation
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Rudena A. Madayag, Angeles University Foundation
- Investigators
- Rudena A Madayag, MAN, Principal investigator, Angeles University Foundation
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06646068
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-CON-Faculty-002
- Other IDs
- 2024-CON-Faculty-002
- Acronym
- MMS
- Status last verified
- Oct 2024
- First submitted
- 11 Oct 2024
- Last updated
- 17 Oct 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: The following individual participant data (IPD) will be shared in this study: De-identified Clinical Judgment Competence Scores: Pre-test and post-test scores measured using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR). These scores will be anonymized to protect participants' identities. Demographic Data: Age, gender, academic year, and other relevant participant characteristics, provided they do not compromise anonymity.
Publications
Madayag RA, Bautista EC, Pineda JPC, Geanga AS, Agustin RMS, Roque ML, Apostol AP, Ramirez DQ. Refining clinical judgment competence in nursing education in the Philippines: A mixed-methods study on the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique in case-based learning. Belitung Nurs J. 2024 Nov 24;10(6):680-694. doi: 10.33546/bnj.3560. eCollection 2024.
PubMed 39601025
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Oct 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Refining Clinical Judgment Competence in Nursing Education: The Impact of the Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique in Case-Based Learning
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06646068
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MMS / 2024-CON-Faculty-002
- Conditions
- Clinical Competence, Nursing Education
- Keywords
- Clinical Judgment Competence in Nursing
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Angeles University FoundationUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 Mar 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 May 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 29 May 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this mixed-methods study is to assess the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique integrated with case-based learning (CBL) on refining clinical judgment competence in senior nursing students in the Philippines.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Does the Philips 66 technique improve clinical judgment competence among nursing students more effectively than traditional CBL methods?
Participants will be senior nursing students, randomly assigned to an intervention group using the Philips 66-CBL and a control group using standard CBL. Clinical judgment competence will be evaluated through pre- and post-test assessments using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) and confidence questionnaires. A subset of participants from the intervention group will take part in focus group discussions to explore their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. Data will be collected over a short-term period for quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Detailed description
This study utilizes an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design to evaluate the effectiveness of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique, integrated with case-based learning (CBL), in enhancing clinical judgment competence among senior nursing students in the Philippines. The study consists of two phases: a quantitative experimental phase and a qualitative exploratory phase.
The quantitative phase adopts a true experimental pre-test/post-test design, involving 60 senior nursing students who will be randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=30) or the control group (n=30). The intervention group will undergo CBL sessions facilitated by the Philips 66 technique, while the control group will follow the standard CBL approach. The Philips 66 technique is a structured form of small group brainstorming where participants collaborate in smaller teams, fostering idea generation and peer learning in a timed setting. Clinical judgment competence will be assessed before and after the intervention using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR), which measures four dimensions of clinical judgment: noticing, interpreting, responding, and reflecting. Additionally, a researcher-designed questionnaire will be used to measure students' confidence levels in their clinical decision-making abilities.
The qualitative phase will involve focus group discussions (FGDs) with a subset of participants from the intervention group to gain deeper insights into their experiences with the Philips 66 technique. These discussions will aim to explore how the technique influences their critical thinking, decision-making, and collaborative learning processes. Thematic analysis will be applied to identify recurring themes and key experiences.
Statistical analysis for the quantitative component will include descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests (such as the Mann-Whitney U test), and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to analyze differences in clinical judgment competence and confidence levels between the two groups. For the qualitative component, data from FGDs will be analyzed thematically to provide contextual understanding and support for the quantitative findings.
The study aims to determine whether the integration of the Philips 66 technique with CBL can significantly enhance the development of clinical judgment competence in nursing students, preparing them for the challenges of real-world clinical settings. Future studies may be conducted across different contexts to validate the long-term effects of this intervention.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- The study evaluated the effectiveness of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique integrated with case-based learning to enhance clinical judgment competence in nursing students. Using a true experimental pre-test/post-test design, 60 students were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. Both groups were exposed to the same clinical case scenarios, but the intervention group participated in Philips 66 sessions. The process included individual reflection (6 minutes) on clinical judgment and disaster triage protocols, followed by 6-minute group brainstorming sessions to collaboratively refine ideas. Group leaders then presented their nursing care plans within a 6-minute timeframe. The model aimed to foster critical thinking, collaboration, and clinical decision-making skills. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) was used for evaluation.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique Group (Intervention Group) | Other | Other: Philips 66 with CBLParticipants in this group will engage in the Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique as part of their case-based learning sessions. This structured method involves dividing participants into smaller groups of 6, with each group discussing a topic for 6 minutes, aimed at enhancing critical thinking and clinical judgment skills in nursing students. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 25 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- BSN students enrolled in their fourth year at a Higher Education Institution in Angeles City, Philippines.
- At least 20 years old.
- Willing to participate in both pre- and post-intervention assessments.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Undergraduate nursing students who do not meet the criteria and refuse to join the study
- Students with anticipated absences exceeding a certain threshold (e.g., more than two sessions)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Philips 66 with CBLAlso: Brainstorming TechniqueEach team is given six minutes to brainstorm ideas or solutions to specific clinical cases. This technique is applied during case-based learning sessions to enhance clinical judgment and critical thinking skills among nursing students. | Other | Philips 66 Brainstorming Technique Group (Intervention Group) |
Primary outcome
Change in Clinical Judgment Competence
Time frame: Assessment of clinical judgment competence will occur at baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) over a one-month period.
The measure will assess the change in clinical judgment competence using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) pre-intervention and immediately post-intervention.
1 secondary outcome
Change in Teamwork and Collaborative Learning
Time frame: Focus group interviews to assess teamwork and collaborative learning will be conducted immediately following the intervention, with each interview expected to last approximately 30-60 minutes.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Oct 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39601025Madayag RA, Bautista EC, Pineda JPC, Geanga AS, Agustin RMS, Roque ML, Apostol AP, Ramirez DQ. Refining clinical judgment competence in nursing education in the Philippines: A mixed-methods study on the impact of the Philips 66 brainstorming technique in case-based learning. Belitung Nurs J. 2024 Nov 24;10(6):680-694. doi: 10.33546/bnj.3560. eCollection 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. The following individual participant data (IPD) will be shared in this study: De-identified Clinical Judgment Competence Scores: Pre-test and post-test scores measured using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR). These scores will be anonymized to protect participants' identities. Demographic Data: Age, gender, academic year, and other relevant participant characteristics, provided they do not compromise anonymity.
Related trials for Clinical Competence
Active, not recruiting
Enhancing Male Nursing Students' Competence in Maternity Care: A Quasi-Experimental Study in Egypt
Maternity Nursing, Obstetric Nursing
Not yet recruitingObservational study
"The Relationship Between Nursing Students' Perceptions of the Clinical Learning Environment and Their Person-Centered Care Competency"
Education Nursing
Not yet recruiting
A Multidimensional Intervention to Improve Ethical Decision-Making Competence Among Nursing Student Interns: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Ethical Decision-Making Competence in Nursing Student Interns
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Follow-Up Evaluation for Gene-Therapy-Related Delayed Adverse Events After Participation in Pediatric Oncology Branch Clinical Trials
Pediatric Cancers, Hematologic Malignancies
Not yet recruiting
The Effectiveness of Situation Awareness Approach on Nursing Competencies in Obstetric Practicum: A Multimodal Teaching
Non-disease Research. Enhancing Nursing Students' Obstetric Situation Awareness and Clinical Decision-making Through Multimodal Teaching, Clinical Competence
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Rudena A Madayag, MAN principal investigator
Angeles University Foundation
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Philips 66 with CBL in people with Clinical Competence and Nursing Education, run by Angeles University Foundation at 1 site in Philippines.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Oct 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Philippines. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Clinical Judgment Competence (time frame: Assessment of clinical judgment competence will occur at baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention using the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) over a one-month period.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06646068, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Oct 2024.