Evaluation of the Impact of the PRONEtect Education Hub vs. Classic Lecture, on the Competencies of Nursing Students

Evaluate the Impact of Online Educational Material (PRONEtect Educational Hub) on Nursing Students' Knowledge, Confidence Levels, and Application of Knowledge Regarding Skin Protection of the Prone Ventilated Patient - a Randomised Controlled Study

The goal of this randomised controlled trial is to compare the impact of online educational material versus a classic lecture on the confidence levels, knowledge and knowledge application of final-year nursing students.

Participants will be asked to complete a baseline self-efficacy evaluation and a baseline knowledge test which were validated by the 11-member international expert panel previously established.

After randomization, the control group will be asked to attend a classic 1-hour lecture at the nursing school about the topic of prone positioning and skin/tissue damage prevention.

The experimental group will get access to the PRONEtect educational website containing short simulation videos and other learning materials.

Three weeks later the participants will be asked to complete the self-efficacy evaluation and knowledge assessment again, additionally a knowledge application assessment.

All the questionnaires will be administered via Qualtrics.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Pressure Ulcer; Prone Position
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: (online) PRONEtect educational material; Other: Classic (normal) one hour lesson/lecture

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 80
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Belgium
  • Ghent, Belgium, 9000
    • Ghent University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Final year nursing students studying towards their Bachelor in Nursing degree
• Chosen topics of critical care nursing as supplementary subject or critical care subjects as part of their course or complex wound management as part of their course.

Exclusion Criteria:

Nursing students who are not yet in their final year of studies.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Triple

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experimental group: Access to online PRONEtect educational material; A website with educational material (simulation video, protocol, checklist).	Other: (online) PRONEtect educational material; This is a website containing educational material like short simulation videos on how to turn a patient from supine-to-prone and prone-to-supine positioning, how to protect the skin from incontinence, or before securing endotracheal-/nasogastric tubes, how to reposition the patient to prevent pressure injuries, a full protocol regarding prone positioning etc.
Active Comparator: Control group: Classic one-hour lecture; Didactive presentation by the usual nursing school lecturer.	Other: Classic (normal) one hour lesson/lecture; As per normal, a classroom lecture given by the nursing school by one of the nursing school lecturers.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Knowledge assessment (test score)	A total sample size of 78 participants (39 in each group, 1:1 allocation ratio) to have at least 80% power to demonstrate non-inferiority of the online package (experimental group) compared to the classical lecture (control group) with respect to the mean change from baseline in knowledge at week 3 at the one-sided 1.25% significance level, when the non-inferiority margin is set at 1 point and when we assume a common standard deviation in both groups of 2.5 points, a true difference between the groups of 1 point in favor of the online package, and a drop-out rate of 20%.	3 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Confidence levels (survey scores)	A total sample size of 78 participants (39 in each group, 1:1 allocation ratio) to have at least 80% power to demonstrate non-inferiority of the online package (experimental group) compared to the classical lecture (control group) with respect to the mean change from baseline in knowledge at week 3 at the one-sided 1.25% significance level, when the non-inferiority margin is set at 1 point and when we assume a common standard deviation in both groups of 2.5 points, a true difference between the groups of 1 point in favor of the online package, and a drop-out rate of 20%.	3 weeks
Difference between the "Knowledge application" (test score) between the groups	Difference between the "Knowledge application" (test score) of 1-2 points between the groups	3 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University Ghent

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): September 27, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): December 23, 2022
• Study Completion (Actual): December 23, 2022

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: October 6, 2022
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: October 10, 2022
• First Posted (Actual): October 12, 2022

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): November 14, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 13, 2023
• Last Verified: November 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Skin Diseases; Skin Ulcer; Pressure Ulcer
• Other Study ID Numbers: PRONEtection #2

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No