The Effects of Participatory Learning Techniques on Nurses' Knowledge of Sepsis and Practices for Infectious Patients admitted at The Medical Ward of Chonburi Hospital

Abstract

This quasi-experimental research aimed to study the effects of participatory learning techniques on nurses’ knowledge of sepsis and practices including, assessing the patients with SOS score and compliance with sepsis care bundles for infectious patients. The samples consisted of 82 registered nurses working in four medical wards. The medical wards were randomly allocated to either a control or an intervention group. Participatory Learning was introduced to the intervention group on the topic related to SOS score, sepsis detection and Bundle Sepsis. The research instruments included a questionnaire about knowledge of sepsis, SOS scoring form, and the Bundle Sepsis audit form. These instruments were approved for their validity and reliability. The questionnaire was examined by experts, and its reliability was 0.7. Data were collected from 1 July 2018 to 31 August 2018. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation were used to describe the basic features of data. Paired samples t-test was used to compare mean score of sepsis knowledge for the same group (intervention group) before and after an intervention. Independent t-test was performed to compare mean score of sepsis knowledge between groups. In addition, Chi-square test was used to test for differences between percentage of intervention and control groups on compliance with Bundle Sepsis. The results of this study revealed that:               

The nurses’ mean scores of knowledge about sepsis increased significantly from 14.54  (SD=1.55)  to 15.73 (SD=1.37) (p=0.001)  after the intervention. Additionally, there were significant differences in assessing the patients with SOS score between the control and intervention groups (72.7% vs. 89.8% ,p=0.001). The study results also revealed that compliance with Bundle Sepsis and the notification rates were significantly higher in the intervention group (64%) compared to control group (36%)(Pp=0.009)