A Comparison of Student Nurse Anesthetists’ Perceptions of Regional Anesthesia Skill and Knowledge Acquisition Utilizing Cadavers Versus Non-Cadaver Models

Abstract

Due to the expansion of healthcare to a larger population and the increased need for more anesthesia providers, Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) are practicing to the full extent of their education and providing a wider range of anesthetic techniques to the general population. One anesthetic technique widely utilized by CRNAs is regional anesthesia. Regional anesthesia is a recognized method of managing pain in the perioperative arena. It has therefore become an integral part of the curriculum in Student Registered Nurse Anesthetists’ (SRNAs’) educational programs. CRNA faculty utilize various models and methods to teach these regional anesthesia techniques and pertinent educational content. Some use cadavers to assist with skill and knowledge mastery while others employ non-cadaveric models. The SRNAs’ perception of regional anesthesia skill and knowledge acquisition has not been determined when either method is used. The purpose of this study is to compare student nurse anesthetists’ self-perception of skill and knowledge acquisition in programs utilizing cadaveric models versus those utilizing non-cadaveric models. To answer the research questions and achieve the study’s purpose, the study utilized a concurrent Convergent Triangulation Design, a typed of Mixed Methods research design that contains a quantitative component followed by a qualitative component within a survey. This survey was distributed nationally via the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) Research Services and Assistance Department. Descriptive statistics and chi-square test for independence were used to examine the data for significant relationships between factors, and categorical themes were identified through content analysis of the open-ended qualitative questions. From the quantitative data gathered, there was no statistically significant difference between the two broad groups of cadaveric versus non-cadaveric methods of instruction (p = 0.508 and p = 0.847), however the qualitative analysis yielded narrative components that elaborated on the vague quantitative findings. Through the qualitative analysis, it can be concluded students felt more confident and prepared in their knowledge and skill acquisition when the teachings were integrative and student-centered. This data also provides direction to nurse anesthesia instructors, emphasizing the best methods for regional anesthesia may not be the traditional methods of lecture typically used.