Development of a group work assessment pedagogy using constructive alignment theory.

The purpose of this paper is to explore group work assessment underpinned by constructive alignment theory to develop a new assessment pedagogy. A review was undertaken of an existing module 'Mental Health Nursing 1', with student nurses participating in the BSc (Hons) Nursing Programme. Constructive alignment theory requires teachers to adopt a deep approach to learning where module learning outcomes are aligned with the teaching environment and modes of assessment. As the module progressed, reviewing the Mental Health Nursing 1 module became an excellent opportunity to begin to understand how constructive alignment theory can inform a group work assessment pedagogy. Working using a constructively aligned assessment process became a valuable learning experience for the module leader whilst at the same time revealed a gap in the research around the impact of constructively aligned teaching and group work assessment.

Simulation on sensory impairment in older adults: nursing education.

Sensory impairments are identified as the most common chronic and disabling conditions of later life, impacting significantly on the quality of life and safety of older adults. Hospitals and care environments can present significant challenges to older adults with sensory impairments. Therefore, it is important to raise awareness on sensory and cognitive impairments with all health professionals, and nurses in particular, both to help develop an empathetic awareness of the impact of impairment and to minimise risk of adverse events. This article reports on a pedagogical innovation on the development and use of a simulation resource-primarily on sensory impairments in older adults-with first-year nursing students in an undergraduate nursing programme in a Scottish university. The article also reports on students' reflections on their experience of participating in this simulation.

What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials.

PURPOSE: The systematic use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has been advocated as an effective way to standardize cancer practice. Yet, the question of whether PROMs can lead to actual improvements in the quality of patient care remains under debate. This review examined whether inclusion of PROM in routine clinical practice is associated with improvements in patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes during active anticancer treatment. METHODS: A systematic review of five electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL [Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature], PsycINFO, and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection [PBSC]) was conducted from database inception to May 2012 to locate randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials of patients receiving active anticancer treatment or supportive care irrespective of type of cancer. RESULTS: Based on prespecified eligibility criteria, we included 26 articles that reported on 24 unique controlled trials. Wide variability in the design and use of interventions delivered, outcomes evaluated, and cancer- and modality-specific context was apparent. Health service outcomes were only scarcely included as end points. Overall, the number of statistically significant findings were limited and PROMs' intervention effect sizes were predominantly small-to-moderate. CONCLUSION: The routine use of PROMs increases the frequency of discussion of patient outcomes during consultations. In some studies, PROMs are associated with improved symptom control, increased supportive care measures, and patient satisfaction. Additional effort is required to ensure patient adherence, as well as additional support to clinicians who will respond to patient concerns and issues, with clear system guidelines in place to guide their responses. More research is required to support PROM cost-benefit in terms of patient safety, clinician burden, and health services usage.