A cross-sectional study evaluates clinical self-efficacy and critical thinking in anaesthesia nursing students, suggesting integration into training programs.
Introduction: Self-efficacy significantly impacts academic performance and clinical competence in healthcare education. Students need to develop confidence and adaptability to handle unpredictable situations in high-pressure fields like anaesthesia nursing. While global studies emphasise self-efficacy's role in clinical training, research on Vietnamese nursing students is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical self-efficacy beliefs of anaesthesia nursing students to understand their confidence levels and identify factors influencing this. Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted from February to June 2024, with Stratified sampling of 205 third- and fourth-year anaesthesia nursing students at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Ho Chi Minh City. The Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance (SECP) scale was used to evaluate students' self-efficacy, and the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory for Medical College Students (CTDI-M) measured critical thinking disposition. Results: The overall clinical self-efficacy score for students was 105.4±12.87. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between self-efficacy and critical thinking disposition among students (rs = 0.37, p < 0.001). Furthermore, a significant linear regression analysis indicated that critical thinking disposition (coefficient = 8.6, p < 0.001), attitudes regarding the characteristics of anaesthesia nursing students (coefficient = 0.9, p < 0.001), and academic year (coefficient = 6.1, p < 0.001) are significant predictors of clinical self-efficacy. Conclusion: Integrating the promotion of critical thinking, addressing specific attitudes, and considering students' academic progression into clinical training programmes is essential. This has important implications for developing training programmes that enhance essential skills and better prepare students for their professional careers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: