Developing information literacy skills in pre-registration nurses: a randomised

controlled trial

Dr Alison Brettle – Research Fellow School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Salford

Mike Raynor – Information Specialist, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

(NICE)

Evidence of effectiveness of information literacy training

Systematic review (Brettle, 2003)Limited evidenceLack of rigour

Systematic review (Brettle, 2007)Lack of established valid or reliable tools

Systematic review (Koufogiannakis and Wiebe, 2006)Effective at improving UG knowledge

2011 – are we any nearer?

Background to the study

• Increase in demand for searching skills to support evidence-based practice (EBP) at pre-registration level

•Pressure growing for remote delivery of searching skills for evidence-based practice

•Opportunity to measure the efficacy of an online resource for teaching information skills

The University of Salford

Objectives

Do pre-registration nurses’ information skills improve following a teaching intervention?

Is an online tutorial at least as good as face-to-face instruction for teaching information skills?

The session content

What is a database?Google and gatewaysScoping searchesSelection of keywordsPICOSynonyms TruncationRetrieving the full-text of articles

Interactions: live screen

Design issues

Ethics involved in educational researchAppropriate sample sizeEnsuring intervention and control receive same

informationAppropriate measurement tool

Methods: data collection protocol

Search exercise 1 and demographic data

collection.

Intervention administered

Search exercise 2 and qualitative data collection

‘Search histories 2’ e-mailed to facilitators

Search histories 1 and 2 compared using SPSS

‘Search histories 1’ e-mailed to facilitators

Study group

Methods: Flow of participants through the study

Assessed for eligibility (all students March 2008 intake) (n=93)

Didn’t attend session (n=16)

Randomised n=77

Online Tutorial n=40

Received tutorial n=36 Did not consent n=4

Face to face n=37 Received face to face n=37 Did not consent = 0

Analysed n= 36 pre-test; 34 post-test n=2 post-test (failed to complete search exercise)

Analysed n=37 pre-test; 35 post-test n=2 post test (failed to complete search exercise)

Scoring the search histories

Pre-test“Why is hand washing effective for infection control?”Correct use of Boolean ‘AND’Correct use of Boolean ‘OR’Use of truncationCorrect selection of keywordsCorrect use of synonyms

Post-test

“Discuss the role of the nurse in the care of the dying”

ResultsComparison Means Implication

Face-to-face Pre-test=0.41Post-test=2.23

Significant differenceImprovement in ability to search

Online Pre-test=0.35Post-test=1.77

Significant differenceImprovement in ability to search

Pre-tests Face-to-face=0.41Online=0.35

No difference

Post-tests Face-to-face=2.23Online=1.77

No difference

Follow-up face to face

Post-test=2.23Follow-up=1.56

No degradation of skills

Follow-up online Post-test=1.77Follow-up=1.25

No degradation of skills

Other data

Demographic data showed both groups were fairly similar

Qualitative data showed majority in favour of online method

“I enjoyed working through session”

“You could work at your own pace, felt relaxed, no pressure to keep up”

“..there was help if needed”

“..could discuss problems with peers”

Very few dislikes

“no personal touch…” “I do like face to face training so if

questions need to be asked they can..”

“I did not understand any of the questions, I don’t know a great deal about computers only the basics, I felt that the session was of no use to me at all”

“I ended up feeling frustrated...I am now confused”

Conclusions

Positive improvement but very small

This improvement is the same for face-to-face or online delivery

Online method is at least as effective as face-to-face for teaching information skills

Skills retention is the same at 6 weeks

Acknowledgements

Ben Mollo – for advice with the tutorial design and development

Phyllis Dickinson – course tutorClaire Hulme – for statistical supportThe students – for taking part!