Computer assisted instruction versus conventional didactic lecture methods on clinical competence of nursing students - a brief meta-analysis

Abstract

Optimum clinical competence in knowledge and skills are the desired learning outcomes in nursing education. Nurse educators seek effective alternative methods of instruction in situations of physical and social distancing where the face-to-face (F2F) lecture method is not feasible. This study aims to determine whether computer-assisted instruction (CAI) compared to the conventional F2F lecture method, is more effective at improving nursing students' clinical competence. This meta-analytic study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. An electronic search for literature was conducted in PubMed, EBSCO essentials, and Google Scholar databases from February to October 2022. Members of the research team separately gathered data from all relevant studies and evaluated the strength of the evidence. Out of 62 articles, only six met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis after duplicate articles were removed. Results showed that CAI and F2F lecture methods were compared in all the included articles. Overall, the meta-analysis found no significant difference in competence outcomes between those who received CAI or F2F lectures (Mann-Whitney U = 18, p = 0.396). In conclusion, CAI is just as effective as F2F at enhancing nursing students' competence. CAI or F2F lecture methods can be used by nurse educators to improve clinical competence outcomes in nursing students.