This literature review examines the debate over how best to measure the efficacy of nursing education, particularly in the context of preoperative care. Drawing on two peer-reviewed nursing journal articles — one by Ruth M. Kleinpell addressing outcome-based performance measurement and another by Linda M. Sigsby and Hosseni Yanardi examining knowledge acquisition in perioperative clinical training — the paper evaluates the strengths and limitations of each approach. The review considers a study comparing baccalaureate nursing students who received perioperative clinical rotations against those who did not, analyzes the statistical results, and critiques the study's methodology, ultimately suggesting that a combination of knowledge-based testing and real-world patient outcome measurement may offer the most complete picture of nursing education quality.
The paper demonstrates comparative source analysis: rather than reviewing each article in isolation, the writer uses one framework (Kleinpell's outcome-based measurement) to interrogate the validity of another study's methodology (Sigsby and Yanardi's knowledge questionnaire). This technique shows how sources can be put in conversation to produce original critical commentary.
The paper opens by establishing the broader policy context — cost pressures on nursing education — before introducing both sources. It then narrows to a detailed summary of the Sigsby and Yanardi study design and statistical results. The final analytical section pivots to critique, identifying the limitations of relying solely on written tests and proposing an outcome-based alternative grounded in Kleinpell's framework. A Works Cited section closes the paper.
In the nursing journal Critical Care Nurse, nurse Ruth M. Kleinpell wrote in 2003 that the contemporary healthcare environment places an emphasis on measuring nursing performance in a process-based and quantifiable fashion. The stress is upon "high-quality service at an affordable price" and "good outcomes" (Kleinpell, 2003, p. 1). Yet little guidance is given to nursing educators on how to achieve these goals — goals that often pull in opposite directions between saving money and providing quality care.
Kleinpell's article argues that evaluating patient outcomes is a superior way of assessing the quality of care. By contrast, Linda M. Sigsby and Hosseni Yanardi, writing in the AORN Journal, suggest that evaluating nursing knowledge is the more appropriate measure — particularly in their article assessing preoperative nursing education specifically. The tension between these two perspectives forms the central concern of this literature review.
Given the strained budgets of many healthcare facilities, Kleinpell stresses that nursing education must demonstrate which teaching methodologies are proven to work. "Measuring outcomes is especially important, as [nursing] roles are being scrutinized" (Kleinpell, 2003, p. 1). Clinical, hands-on experiences for student nurses are being cut back in some areas and replaced by classroom instruction in order to reduce costs.
However, the AORN Journal — a monthly publication focusing on perioperative nursing — argues that this trend is to the detriment of care for prospective preoperative nurses. A study by Sigsby and Yanardi attempted to address the fact that nursing students today have fewer hands-on opportunities to care for pre-surgical patients during their training. Their central question was whether hands-on clinical experience produces better preoperative nurses — in other words, whether specialty training in one's chosen field makes a nurse a better healthcare provider later on.
The study evaluated the effects of using a perioperative clinical learning setting for a medical-surgical nursing course within a baccalaureate nursing program. Two cohorts of students who entered the nursing program in academic years 1998 and 1999 were measured at the end of their junior year and again at the end of their senior year.
"The independent variable was the clinical learning setting for a medical-surgical nursing course — either a perioperative or another medical-surgical setting. Dependent variables included knowledge of surgical patient care and employment in perioperative units after graduation" (Sigsby & Yanardi, 2004, p. 1). Although classes in preoperative care had been introduced into many curricula for all nurses, Sigsby concedes that there is a vital clinical aspect to this form of nursing care that must be addressed for all individuals entering the field. Thus, the study attempted to assess these students' ability to deliver quality care in a specific medical specialty, while also addressing Kleinpell's concerns about quality, efficacy, and cost-efficient procedures — including the question of whether training costs could be reduced when preparing nurses for the specialty fields they intended to pursue.
You’re 48% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.