Nursing Students' Technological Equipment Usage Status and Individual Innovation Levels

Saturday, 29 July 2017

Hatice Kaya, PhD1
Nuray Turan, PhD1
Hanife Durgun, MSc1
Turkinaz Asti, PhD2
(1)Department of Fundamentals of Nursing, Istanbul University, Florence Nightingale Nursing Faculty, Istanbul, Turkey
(2)Nursing Department, Bezmialem University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey

Purpose:

This research was carried out to determine nursing students' technological equipment-usage status and individual innovation levels, and the relationship between them.

Methods:

All nursing students studying in the Nursing Department of a Faculty of Health Sciences in Istanbul in the 2015-2016 academic year constituted the population of the research which was designed in the descriptive-cross-sectional type, and 165 nursing students who agreed to participate in the study constituted the sample group. Informed consent was obtained from the institution and the students before starting the research. The data were collected by interviewing face-to-face using Structured Question Form, Technological Equipment Usage Scale and Individual Innovation Scale. In the evaluation of the data, Student t test, Mann Whitney U test and Pearson Correlation Analysis were used in addition to descriptive statistical methods (mean, standard deviation, frequency).

Results:

It was determined that the age average of the students was 20.92±1.63 years, 93.3% of them were female, 98.2% of them were single, 47.3% of them had 2 siblings, the incomes of 87.3% of them covered their expenses, 94.5% of them had health insurance, 92.1% of them did not work in any job, 80% of them lived with their family, and 89.7% of them spent most of their lives in the Marmara Region. It was found that 85.5% of the students were members of at least one social networking site, 83% of them used social networking sites every day, and they spent an average of 2.32±1.89 hours on these sites. When their technological equipment usage statuses were examined, it was determined that 95.8% of the students mostly preferred smart phones among technological equipments, they spent an average of 4.72±2.93 hours per day on smart phone, the number of controlling smart phone was an average of 26.02±23.38 times in a day, 61.2% of them preferred Android system on smart phone operating system, and 80.6% of them preferred WIFI 4.5G connection. In the Technological Equipment Usage Scale, it was determined that the point average of the Technological Equipment Usage sub-dimension was 50.44±14.51, Social Media sub-dimension was 27.86±10.09, The Place of Technology in Life sub-dimension was 27.53±7.68, Educational Use sub-dimension was 29.32±7.19, and the Communication sub-dimension was 16.01±5.20. It was found that the total point average of the Technological Equipment Usage Scale was 135.15±27.09, and the point average of the Individual Innovation Scale was 61.02±8.89. In the sub-dimensions of the Technological Equipment Usage Scale, a statistically negative relationship was found between the total points of the Technological Equipment Usage sub-dimension and the Individual Innovation Scale (p<0.05), a statistically positive relationship was found between the total points of the Place of Technology in Life sub-dimension and Individual Innovation Scale (p<0.05), a statistically positive relationship was found between the total points of the Educational Use sub-dimension and Individual Innovation Scale (p<0.05), and a statistically significant negative relationship was found between the total points of the Communication sub-dimension and Individual Innovation Scale (p<0.05).

According to individual characteristics, when the points of the Technological Equipment Usage Scale and the Individual Innovation Scale were compared, a statistically significant difference was found in terms of the number of siblings and the Educational Use sub-dimension points (p<0.05). It was determined that the Communication sub-dimension points of the students working in any job were statistically significantly higher compared to nonworking students (p<0.05).

Conclusion:

While students' technological equipment usages are at medium-level, their individual innovations are at the level of questioning. It is very important for nursing students to be innovative, to initiate and sustain innovation within the context of the use of technological equipments and their contemporary roles and responsibilities. In this context, awareness should be created in the process of nursing education.