Clinical Learning Environment and Supervision: Experience and Satisfaction Level of Final Year Basic Students, Kaduna State College of Nursing and Midwifery, Kafanchan
Jonathan Joesph,Mercy Adamu,Babangida Ali,John Kullang,Olajumoke Dele-Alonge,,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59073/thenursingscope61/12-24
2023-12-01
Abstract:Background: Clinical Learning Environment is essentially anywhere students of healthcare disciplines learn clinical experience about patient care. Thus, Clinical placement forms a significant part of educating the nursing and midwifery students whose curriculum stipulates spending more than twice the number of hours in a clinical environment relative to the hours in the classroom necessary for competence development, integration of theoretical knowledge, clinical practice, and professionalism. This study assessed the experience and satisfaction level of nursing and midwifery students with CLE and supervision at Kaduna State College of Nursing and Midwifery, Kafanchan, and attempted to associate the program type with the study variables. Method: The study employed a descriptive cross-sectional design. Stratified sampling was adopted in selecting 92 final year students of nursing and midwifery schools out of 120. Adapted CLES+T was used to collect data from the respondents. For experience and satisfaction level towards CLE and Supervision, items were scored. For each variable, score <40%, ≥40<70%, and ≥70% was considered inadequate, moderate, and adequate, respectively. Chi-square was used to test the association between variables at a significant level of 0.05. Result: The mean age of respondents was 23.6 (±0.3) years, as the majority (54.4%) were between ages 19-24 years who have had a minimum of 5 clinical placements (41.1%). The majority of the respondents reported moderate experience with CLE and supervision (71.1%), which translated to respondents who reported adequate satisfaction with CLE and supervision (77.8%). There was a statistical association between the type of program and satisfaction with CLE and supervision (χ2 =7.19, df = 2, p = 0.027), with basic midwifery programs accounting for the difference. Conclusion: Given the moderate experience with CLE and Supervision and the positive relationship between the type of program and satisfaction with CLE and Supervision where basic midwifery accounted for the difference, the management of the College and that of the General Hospital must evaluate the CLE, ensuring learning objectives can be met in all sections and units of the hospital, to better prepare students for practice.