critical thinking tools in nursing

What is Critical Thinking in Nursing? (With Examples, Importance, & How to Improve)

Successful nursing requires learning several skills used to communicate with patients, families, and healthcare teams. One of the most essential skills nurses must develop is the ability to demonstrate critical thinking. If you are a nurse, perhaps you have asked if there is a way to know how to improve critical thinking in nursing? As you read this article, you will learn what critical thinking in nursing is and why it is important. You will also find 18 simple tips to improve critical thinking in nursing and sample scenarios about how to apply critical thinking in your nursing career.

What Is Critical Thinking In Nursing?

4 reasons why critical thinking is so important in nursing, 1. critical thinking skills will help you anticipate and understand changes in your patient’s condition., 2. with strong critical thinking skills, you can make decisions about patient care that is most favorable for the patient and intended outcomes., 3. strong critical thinking skills in nursing can contribute to innovative improvements and professional development., 4. critical thinking skills in nursing contribute to rational decision-making, which improves patient outcomes., what are the 8 important attributes of excellent critical thinking in nursing, 1. the ability to interpret information:, 2. independent thought:, 3. impartiality:, 4. intuition:, 5. problem solving:, 6. flexibility:, 7. perseverance:, 8. integrity:, examples of poor critical thinking vs excellent critical thinking in nursing, 1. scenario: patient/caregiver interactions, poor critical thinking:, excellent critical thinking:, 2. scenario: improving patient care quality, 3. scenario: interdisciplinary collaboration, 4. scenario: precepting nursing students and other nurses, how to improve critical thinking in nursing, 1. demonstrate open-mindedness., 2. practice self-awareness., 3. avoid judgment., 4. eliminate personal biases., 5. do not be afraid to ask questions., 6. find an experienced mentor., 7. join professional nursing organizations., 8. establish a routine of self-reflection., 9. utilize the chain of command., 10. determine the significance of data and decide if it is sufficient for decision-making., 11. volunteer for leadership positions or opportunities., 12. use previous facts and experiences to help develop stronger critical thinking skills in nursing., 13. establish priorities., 14. trust your knowledge and be confident in your abilities., 15. be curious about everything., 16. practice fair-mindedness., 17. learn the value of intellectual humility., 18. never stop learning., 4 consequences of poor critical thinking in nursing, 1. the most significant risk associated with poor critical thinking in nursing is inadequate patient care., 2. failure to recognize changes in patient status:, 3. lack of effective critical thinking in nursing can impact the cost of healthcare., 4. lack of critical thinking skills in nursing can cause a breakdown in communication within the interdisciplinary team., useful resources to improve critical thinking in nursing, youtube videos, my final thoughts, frequently asked questions answered by our expert, 1. will lack of critical thinking impact my nursing career, 2. usually, how long does it take for a nurse to improve their critical thinking skills, 3. do all types of nurses require excellent critical thinking skills, 4. how can i assess my critical thinking skills in nursing.

• Ask relevant questions • Justify opinions • Address and evaluate multiple points of view • Explain assumptions and reasons related to your choice of patient care options

5. Can I Be a Nurse If I Cannot Think Critically?

The Value of Critical Thinking in Nursing

• How Nurses Use Critical Thinking
• How to Improve Critical Thinking
• Common Mistakes

Some experts describe a person’s ability to question belief systems, test previously held assumptions, and recognize ambiguity as evidence of critical thinking. Others identify specific skills that demonstrate critical thinking, such as the ability to identify problems and biases, infer and draw conclusions, and determine the relevance of information to a situation.

Nicholas McGowan, BSN, RN, CCRN, has been a critical care nurse for 10 years in neurological trauma nursing and cardiovascular and surgical intensive care. He defines critical thinking as “necessary for problem-solving and decision-making by healthcare providers. It is a process where people use a logical process to gather information and take purposeful action based on their evaluation.”

“This cognitive process is vital for excellent patient outcomes because it requires that nurses make clinical decisions utilizing a variety of different lenses, such as fairness, ethics, and evidence-based practice,” he says.

How Do Nurses Use Critical Thinking?

Successful nurses think beyond their assigned tasks to deliver excellent care for their patients. For example, a nurse might be tasked with changing a wound dressing, delivering medications, and monitoring vital signs during a shift. However, it requires critical thinking skills to understand how a difference in the wound may affect blood pressure and temperature and when those changes may require immediate medical intervention.

Nurses care for many patients during their shifts. Strong critical thinking skills are crucial when juggling various tasks so patient safety and care are not compromised.

Jenna Liphart Rhoads, Ph.D., RN, is a nurse educator with a clinical background in surgical-trauma adult critical care, where critical thinking and action were essential to the safety of her patients. She talks about examples of critical thinking in a healthcare environment, saying:

“Nurses must also critically think to determine which patient to see first, which medications to pass first, and the order in which to organize their day caring for patients. Patient conditions and environments are continually in flux, therefore nurses must constantly be evaluating and re-evaluating information they gather (assess) to keep their patients safe.”

The COVID-19 pandemic created hospital care situations where critical thinking was essential. It was expected of the nurses on the general floor and in intensive care units. Crystal Slaughter is an advanced practice nurse in the intensive care unit (ICU) and a nurse educator. She observed critical thinking throughout the pandemic as she watched intensive care nurses test the boundaries of previously held beliefs and master providing excellent care while preserving resources.

“Nurses are at the patient’s bedside and are often the first ones to detect issues. Then, the nurse needs to gather the appropriate subjective and objective data from the patient in order to frame a concise problem statement or question for the physician or advanced practice provider,” she explains.

Top 5 Ways Nurses Can Improve Critical Thinking Skills

We asked our experts for the top five strategies nurses can use to purposefully improve their critical thinking skills.

Case-Based Approach

Slaughter is a fan of the case-based approach to learning critical thinking skills.

In much the same way a detective would approach a mystery, she mentors her students to ask questions about the situation that help determine the information they have and the information they need. “What is going on? What information am I missing? Can I get that information? What does that information mean for the patient? How quickly do I need to act?”

Consider forming a group and working with a mentor who can guide you through case studies. This provides you with a learner-centered environment in which you can analyze data to reach conclusions and develop communication, analytical, and collaborative skills with your colleagues.

Practice Self-Reflection

Rhoads is an advocate for self-reflection. “Nurses should reflect upon what went well or did not go well in their workday and identify areas of improvement or situations in which they should have reached out for help.” Self-reflection is a form of personal analysis to observe and evaluate situations and how you responded.

This gives you the opportunity to discover mistakes you may have made and to establish new behavior patterns that may help you make better decisions. You likely already do this. For example, after a disagreement or contentious meeting, you may go over the conversation in your head and think about ways you could have responded.

It’s important to go through the decisions you made during your day and determine if you should have gotten more information before acting or if you could have asked better questions.

During self-reflection, you may try thinking about the problem in reverse. This may not give you an immediate answer, but can help you see the situation with fresh eyes and a new perspective. How would the outcome of the day be different if you planned the dressing change in reverse with the assumption you would find a wound infection? How does this information change your plan for the next dressing change?

Develop a Questioning Mind

McGowan has learned that “critical thinking is a self-driven process. It isn’t something that can simply be taught. Rather, it is something that you practice and cultivate with experience. To develop critical thinking skills, you have to be curious and inquisitive.”

To gain critical thinking skills, you must undergo a purposeful process of learning strategies and using them consistently so they become a habit. One of those strategies is developing a questioning mind. Meaningful questions lead to useful answers and are at the core of critical thinking .

However, learning to ask insightful questions is a skill you must develop. Faced with staff and nursing shortages , declining patient conditions, and a rising number of tasks to be completed, it may be difficult to do more than finish the task in front of you. Yet, questions drive active learning and train your brain to see the world differently and take nothing for granted.

It is easier to practice questioning in a non-stressful, quiet environment until it becomes a habit. Then, in the moment when your patient’s care depends on your ability to ask the right questions, you can be ready to rise to the occasion.

Practice Self-Awareness in the Moment

Critical thinking in nursing requires self-awareness and being present in the moment. During a hectic shift, it is easy to lose focus as you struggle to finish every task needed for your patients. Passing medication, changing dressings, and hanging intravenous lines all while trying to assess your patient’s mental and emotional status can affect your focus and how you manage stress as a nurse .

Staying present helps you to be proactive in your thinking and anticipate what might happen, such as bringing extra lubricant for a catheterization or extra gloves for a dressing change.

By staying present, you are also better able to practice active listening. This raises your assessment skills and gives you more information as a basis for your interventions and decisions.

Use a Process

As you are developing critical thinking skills, it can be helpful to use a process. For example:

• Ask questions.
• Gather information.
• Implement a strategy.
• Evaluate the results.
• Consider another point of view.

These are the fundamental steps of the nursing process (assess, diagnose, plan, implement, evaluate). The last step will help you overcome one of the common problems of critical thinking in nursing — personal bias.

Common Critical Thinking Pitfalls in Nursing

Your brain uses a set of processes to make inferences about what’s happening around you. In some cases, your unreliable biases can lead you down the wrong path. McGowan places personal biases at the top of his list of common pitfalls to critical thinking in nursing.

“We all form biases based on our own experiences. However, nurses have to learn to separate their own biases from each patient encounter to avoid making false assumptions that may interfere with their care,” he says. Successful critical thinkers accept they have personal biases and learn to look out for them. Awareness of your biases is the first step to understanding if your personal bias is contributing to the wrong decision.

New nurses may be overwhelmed by the transition from academics to clinical practice, leading to a task-oriented mindset and a common new nurse mistake ; this conflicts with critical thinking skills.

“Consider a patient whose blood pressure is low but who also needs to take a blood pressure medication at a scheduled time. A task-oriented nurse may provide the medication without regard for the patient’s blood pressure because medication administration is a task that must be completed,” Slaughter says. “A nurse employing critical thinking skills would address the low blood pressure, review the patient’s blood pressure history and trends, and potentially call the physician to discuss whether medication should be withheld.”

Fear and pride may also stand in the way of developing critical thinking skills. Your belief system and worldview provide comfort and guidance, but this can impede your judgment when you are faced with an individual whose belief system or cultural practices are not the same as yours. Fear or pride may prevent you from pursuing a line of questioning that would benefit the patient. Nurses with strong critical thinking skills exhibit:

• Learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of other nurses
• Look forward to integrating changes that improve patient care
• Treat each patient interaction as a part of a whole
• Evaluate new events based on past knowledge and adjust decision-making as needed
• Solve problems with their colleagues
• Are self-confident
• Acknowledge biases and seek to ensure these do not impact patient care

An Essential Skill for All Nurses

Critical thinking in nursing protects patient health and contributes to professional development and career advancement. Administrative and clinical nursing leaders are required to have strong critical thinking skills to be successful in their positions.

By using the strategies in this guide during your daily life and in your nursing role, you can intentionally improve your critical thinking abilities and be rewarded with better patient outcomes and potential career advancement.

Frequently Asked Questions About Critical Thinking in Nursing

How are critical thinking skills utilized in nursing practice.

Nursing practice utilizes critical thinking skills to provide the best care for patients. Often, the patient’s cause of pain or health issue is not immediately clear. Nursing professionals need to use their knowledge to determine what might be causing distress, collect vital information, and make quick decisions on how best to handle the situation.

How does nursing school develop critical thinking skills?

Nursing school gives students the knowledge professional nurses use to make important healthcare decisions for their patients. Students learn about diseases, anatomy, and physiology, and how to improve the patient’s overall well-being. Learners also participate in supervised clinical experiences, where they practice using their critical thinking skills to make decisions in professional settings.

Do only nurse managers use critical thinking?

Nurse managers certainly use critical thinking skills in their daily duties. But when working in a health setting, anyone giving care to patients uses their critical thinking skills. Everyone — including licensed practical nurses, registered nurses, and advanced nurse practitioners —needs to flex their critical thinking skills to make potentially life-saving decisions.

Meet Our Contributors

Crystal Slaughter, DNP, APRN, ACNS-BC, CNE

Crystal Slaughter is a core faculty member in Walden University’s RN-to-BSN program. She has worked as an advanced practice registered nurse with an intensivist/pulmonary service to provide care to hospitalized ICU patients and in inpatient palliative care. Slaughter’s clinical interests lie in nursing education and evidence-based practice initiatives to promote improving patient care.

Jenna Liphart Rhoads, Ph.D., RN

Jenna Liphart Rhoads is a nurse educator and freelance author and editor. She earned a BSN from Saint Francis Medical Center College of Nursing and an MS in nursing education from Northern Illinois University. Rhoads earned a Ph.D. in education with a concentration in nursing education from Capella University where she researched the moderation effects of emotional intelligence on the relationship of stress and GPA in military veteran nursing students. Her clinical background includes surgical-trauma adult critical care, interventional radiology procedures, and conscious sedation in adult and pediatric populations.

Nicholas McGowan, BSN, RN, CCRN

Nicholas McGowan is a critical care nurse with 10 years of experience in cardiovascular, surgical intensive care, and neurological trauma nursing. McGowan also has a background in education, leadership, and public speaking. He is an online learner who builds on his foundation of critical care nursing, which he uses directly at the bedside where he still practices. In addition, McGowan hosts an online course at Critical Care Academy where he helps nurses achieve critical care (CCRN) certification.

• Pre-Nursing
• Nursing School
• After Graduation

How to Apply Critical Thinking in Nursing

Harnessing the power of critical thinking can be the key to becoming a successful and competent nurse. 

Developing and refining your critical thinking skills is crucial as you embark on your nursing journey. By doing so, you’ll enhance your ability to provide high-quality care, advance your professional growth, and contribute to the ever-evolving nursing field.

What is critical thinking in nursing?

Critical thinking is an essential cognitive process that enables nurses to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information to make informed decisions. In the context of nursing, it involves observing, interpreting, and responding to patient needs effectively. 

Critical thinking allows nurses to go beyond memorized facts and apply logical reasoning to address patient problems holistically.

As a nurse, you’ll encounter multifaceted healthcare scenarios, each presenting its unique challenges. Critical thinking enables you to approach these situations systematically, evaluate the available data, identify relevant factors, and understand the patient’s condition comprehensively.

By employing critical thinking skills, you can differentiate between urgent and non-urgent issues, prioritize care, anticipate potential complications, and adapt your interventions accordingly. This analytical approach helps minimize errors, promote patient safety, and achieve positive patient outcomes.

Why is critical thinking important in nursing?

Critical thinking serves as the backbone of nursing practice. You’ll encounter various uncertainties, changing conditions, and ethical dilemmas as a nurse. Developing critical thinking abilities empowers you to navigate these challenges confidently and provide optimal patient care.

In nursing, critical thinking is crucial for the following reasons:

• Enhanced Clinical Judgment: Critical thinking enables assessing complex situations, analyzing available information, and drawing logical conclusions. It enhances your clinical judgment, allowing you to make informed decisions based on the best available evidence and expert consensus.
• Effective Problem Solving: Nursing involves encountering problems and finding effective solutions. Critical thinking equips you with the tools to identify underlying issues, explore alternative options, and implement interventions that address the root cause of the problem.
• Patient Advocacy: Critical thinking empowers you to advocate for your patients’ needs. By actively engaging in critical inquiry, you can challenge assumptions, question policies, and promote patient-centered care.
• Adapting to Changing Environments: Healthcare is constantly evolving, with new research findings, technologies, and treatments emerging regularly. Developing critical thinking skills helps you adapt to these changes, ensuring you stay updated and deliver evidence-based care.

Examples of Critical Thinking in Nursing

Let’s dive into some real-life examples that highlight how critical thinking plays a crucial role in nursing practice:

• Prioritization: Imagine working in an emergency department where multiple patients arrive simultaneously with varying degrees of severity. Utilizing critical thinking, you can assess each patient’s condition, prioritize care based on the urgency of their needs, and allocate resources effectively.
• Medication Administration: When administering medication, critical thinking prompts you to cross-check the prescribed dose, assess potential drug interactions or allergies, and evaluate the patient’s response to the medication. This proactive approach ensures patient safety and minimizes medication errors.
• Ethical Dilemmas: Critical thinking helps you navigate complex ethical dilemmas by analyzing the values at stake, considering legal and ethical principles, and collaborating with the healthcare team to make decisions that align with the patient’s best interests.

Supplement Your Nursing Studies and Boost Your Grades

At SimpleNursing , we understand the significance of critical thinking in nursing education. Our comprehensive digital study tools are designed to enhance your critical thinking abilities, providing you with interactive case studies, practice questions, and simulated patient scenarios. 

Boost your confidence and excel in your nursing studies with SimpleNursing’s innovative study resources.

Sign up for a free trial and take your nursing study skills to new heights.

Want to ace Nursing School Exams & the NCLEX?

Make topics click with easy-to-understand videos & more. We've helped over 1,000,000 students & we can help you too.

Share this post

Nursing students trust simplenursing.

SimpleNursing Student Testimonial

Most recent posts.

Nursing School Knowledge: Flexion vs. Extension

It’s time for another anatomy lesson.  This time, we’re discussing two important movements of the…

Tibia and Fibula Anatomy with Labeled Diagram

Remember the song lyrics, “The leg bone connected to the knee bone, the knee bone…

Nursing School Knowledge: The Ribs’ Anatomy

Pop quiz: How many ribs does the average human adult have?  12 24 36 If…

Nursing School Knowledge: Inversion vs Eversion of the Foot

Imagine you’re walking down the street and suddenly trip and roll your ankle.  What just…

Find what you are interested in

Critical Thinking in Nursing

• First Online: 02 January 2023

Cite this chapter

• Şefika Dilek Güven 3  

Part of the book series: Integrated Science ((IS,volume 12))

1029 Accesses

Critical thinking is an integral part of nursing, especially in terms of professionalization and independent clinical decision-making. It is necessary to think critically to provide adequate, creative, and effective nursing care when making the right decisions for practices and care in the clinical setting and solving various ethical issues encountered. Nurses should develop their critical thinking skills so that they can analyze the problems of the current century, keep up with new developments and changes, cope with nursing problems they encounter, identify more complex patient care needs, provide more systematic care, give the most appropriate patient care in line with the education they have received, and make clinical decisions. The present chapter briefly examines critical thinking, how it relates to nursing, and which skills nurses need to develop as critical thinkers.

Graphical Abstract/Art Performance

Critical thinking in nursing.

This painting shows a nurse and how she is thinking critically. On the right side are the stages of critical thinking and on the left side, there are challenges that a nurse might face. The entire background is also painted in several colors to represent a kind of intellectual puzzle. It is made using colored pencils and markers.

(Adapted with permission from the Association of Science and Art (ASA), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN); Painting by Mahshad Naserpour).

• Clinical decision-making
• Critical thinking
• Critical thinking skills
• Decision-making

Unless the individuals of a nation thinkers, the masses can be drawn in any direction. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bilgiç Ş, Kurtuluş Tosun Z (2016) Birinci ve son sınıf hemşirelik öğrencilerinde eleştirel düşünme ve etkileyen faktörler. Sağlık Bilimleri ve Meslekleri Dergisi 3(1):39–47

Article   Google Scholar  

Kantek F, Yıldırım N (2019) The effects of nursing education on critical thinking of students: a meta-analysis. Florence Nightingale Hemşirelik Dergisi 27(1):17–25

Ennis R (1996) Critical thinking dispositions: their nature and assessability. Informal Logic 18(2):165–182

Riddell T (2007) Critical assumptions: thinking critically about critical thinking. J Nurs Educ 46(3):121–126

Cüceloğlu D (2001) İyi düşün doğru karar ver. Remzi Kitabevi, pp 242–284

Google Scholar  

Kurnaz A (2019) Eleştirel düşünme öğretimi etkinlikleri Planlama-Uygulama ve Değerlendirme. Eğitim yayın evi, p 27

Doğanay A, Ünal F (2006) Eleştirel düşünmenin öğretimi. In: İçerik Türlerine Dayalı Öğretim. Ankara Nobel Yayınevi, pp 209–261

Scheffer B-K, Rubenfeld M-G (2000) A consensus statement on critical thinking in nursing. J Nurs Educ 39(8):352–359

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Rubenfeld M-G, Scheffer B (2014) Critical thinking tactics for nurses. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, pp 5–6, 7, 19–20

Gobet F (2005) Chunking models of expertise: implications for education. Appl Cogn Psychol 19:183–204

Ay F-A (2008) Mesleki temel kavramlar. In: Temel hemşirelik: Kavramlar, ilkeler, uygulamalar. İstanbul Medikal Yayıncılık, pp 205–220

Birol L (2010) Hemşirelik bakımında sistematik yaklaşım. In: Hemşirelik süreci. Berke Ofset Matbaacılık, pp 35–45

Twibell R, Ryan M, Hermiz M (2005) Faculty perceptions of critical thinking in student clinical experiences. J Nurs Educ 44(2):71–79

The Importance of Critical Thinking in Nursing. 19 November 2018 by Carson-Newman University Online. https://onlinenursing.cn.edu/news/value-critical-thinking-nursing

Suzanne C, Smeltzer Brenda G, Bare Janice L, Cheever HK (2010) Definition of critical thinking, critical thinking process. Medical surgical nursing. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, pp 27–28

Profetto-McGrath J (2003) The relationship of critical thinking skills and critical thinking dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. J Adv Nurs 43(6):569–577

Elaine S, Mary C (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Int J Nurs Pract 8(2):89–98

Brunt B-A (2005) Critical thinking in nursing: an integrated review. J Continuing Educ Nurs 36(2):60–67

Carter L-M, Rukholm E (2008) A study of critical thinking, teacher–student interaction, and discipline-specific writing in an online educational setting for registered nurses. J Continuing Educ Nurs 39(3):133–138

Daly W-M (2001) The development of an alternative method in the assessment of critical thinking as an outcome of nursing education. J Adv Nurs 36(1):120–130

Edwards S-L (2007) Critical thinking: a two-phase framework. Nurse Educ Pract 7(5):303–314

Rogal S-M, Young J (2008) Exploring critical thinking in critical care nursing education: a pilot study. J Continuing Educ Nurs 39(1):28–33

Worrell J-A, Profetto-McGrath J (2007) Critical thinking as an outcome of context-based learning among post RN students: a literature review. Nurse Educ Today 27(5):420–426

Morrall P, Goodman B (2013) Critical thinking, nurse education and universities: some thoughts on current issues and implications for nursing practice. Nurse Educ Today 33(9):935–937

Raymond-Seniuk C, Profetto-McGrath J (2011) Can one learn to think critically?—a philosophical exploration. Open Nurs J 5:45–51

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Semra ve Vefa Küçük, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nursing Department, 2000 Evler Mah. Damat İbrahim Paşa Yerleşkesi, Nevşehir, Turkey

Şefika Dilek Güven

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Şefika Dilek Güven .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Stockholm, Sweden

Nima Rezaei

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Güven, Ş.D. (2023). Critical Thinking in Nursing. In: Rezaei, N. (eds) Brain, Decision Making and Mental Health. Integrated Science, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15959-6_10

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15959-6_10

Published : 02 January 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-15958-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-15959-6

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Critical Thinking Tools for Quality Improvement Projects

• Standard View
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Cite Icon Cite
• Get Permissions

Kimberly Whiteman , Jason Yaglowski , Kimberly Stephens; Critical Thinking Tools for Quality Improvement Projects. Crit Care Nurse 1 April 2021; 41 (2): e1–e9. doi: https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2021914

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

This article explores the use of 4 quality improvement tools and 2 evidence-based practice tools that, when used within the nursing process, encourage critical thinking about quality issues.

Patients and families expect to receive patient-centered, high-quality, and cost-effective care. Caring for critically ill patients is challenging and requires nurses to engage in quality improvement efforts to ensure that they provide evidence-based care.

To explore the use of critical thinking tools and evidence-based practice tools in assessing and diagnosing quality issues in the clinical setting.

The nursing process serves as the framework for problem solving. Some commonly used critical thinking tools for assessing and diagnosing quality issues are described, including the Spaghetti Diagram, the 5 Whys, the Cause and Effect Diagram, and the Pareto chart.

This article has been designated for CE contact hour(s). The evaluation tests your knowledge of the following objectives:

Describe how the nursing process can be used to improve the quality of nursing care.

Identify the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Model for Improvement as a free resource for improving patient care.

Explore a clinical practice issue using one of the described critical thinking tools: the Spaghetti Diagram, the 5 Whys, or the Cause and Effect Diagram.

To complete evaluation for CE contact hour(s) for activity C2121, visit www.ccnonline.org and click the “CE Articles” button. No CE fee for AACN members. This activity expires on April 1, 2023.

The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses is accredited as a provider of nursing continuing professional development by the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation, ANCC Provider Number 0012. AACN has been approved as a provider of continuing education in nursing by the California Board of Registered Nursing (CA BRN), CA Provider Number CEP1036, for 1 contact hour.

Nursing practice has become increasingly driven by data since the late 1990s . In 1998, the American Nurses Association established the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators to collect data on nursing-sensitive patient care outcomes, which enabled the Association to benchmark quality data. 1   National initiatives such as the core measures from The Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services require documentation of patient outcomes that have been improved through the application of evidence-based processes. 2   Many states and specialty organizations participate in registries that permit the quality of care to be benchmarked. 3   In addition, the use of electronic medical records has made it possible for nurses to gather information from patient records that can be tailored to investigations of specific quality questions or the care that patients with a given diagnosis or treatment receive while in the hospital. 4  

As technology and levels of information advance, nurses must decipher and synthesize numerous reports, charts, and spreadsheets, and then implement that knowledge to improve the quality of patient care. In fact, both the American Nurses Association 5   and the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses 6   identify participation in quality improvement (QI) efforts as part of a nurse’s role. Some hospitals, especially those that have received or are seeking Magnet designation, have hired nurses with advanced degrees to guide bedside caregivers in research, evidence-based practice, and QI initiatives. 7   For nurses who work in hospitals but do not have advanced education related to QI, navigating the many critical thinking and evidence-based practice tools to improve patient care can be daunting.

Participation in quality improvement efforts is part of every nurse’s role .

This article explains 4 critical thinking tools and 2 evidence-based practice tools that nurses can use as adjuncts to the nursing process (assess, diagnose, plan, implement, and evaluate) to facilitate QI. In clinical practice, registered nurses use observations, communications, and a stethoscope to assess patients and formulate diagnoses. In quality initiatives, nurses replace their stethoscopes with critical thinking, QI, and evidence-based practice tools. Nurses can use these tools in conjunction with the familiar nursing process to identify areas for improvement and, when appropriate, to plan practices changes.

As in the nursing process, the first step in any quality initiative is to assess the process or problem that needs to be improved. An early initial step is to form an interprofessional team of caregivers. The team should include stakeholders whose practice could be involved in or changed by the initiative. Consider forming an interprofessional team including bedside nurses; physicians; respiratory, physical, and speech therapists; nursing assistants; and unit-based secretaries as well as patients and their families. Improving clinical practice and sustaining those improvements require leadership support from all levels within the organization. 3  

Once the team has been assembled, it should thoroughly assess the problem or quality issue. When problems occur in the workplace—either as a clinical issue, such as an increase in the number of medication errors, or as a need for improvement, such as a change in workflow—health care workers often want to identify the cause and remedy the situation quickly. Solving complex problems, however, requires in-depth exploration of both the issue and the factors contributing to it. Investing the time necessary to complete a thorough assessment is an essential step in improvement. Include as many means of examining the problem as possible, such as unit or hospital data, observations of current practices, conversations with caregivers and stakeholders, and information specific to the local problem. Clinical nurses who provide direct care to patients are in a unique position to identify quality issues. 8  

In addition to clinical nurses identifying quality issues, hospital data—such as quality or risk reports that reveal, for example, an increase in the number of infections or falls—often alert nursing leaders to clinical triggers for improvement, but triggers can also arise from interactions with patients and families or from new knowledge. 9   Examples of improvement opportunities arising from interactions with patients are a request for a family to be present during resuscitation 10   and frequent requests from patients or family members for educational materials. 11   The release of new or updated practice guidelines, such as the 2016 update to the sepsis guideline 12   and subsequent changes in the 2018 update, 13   are examples of new knowledge that might prompt the need for practice changes.

Despite the type of trigger for a quality initiative, once the team has identified a problem, the next nursing actions are the same: Complete an inquiry to determine whether the event was a 1-time occurrence or a continuing problem. Explore current practices to determine the scope of the problem. Also, determine whether this issue is a priority for the organization. In general, selecting continual problems that are a high priority for the organization will result in increased administrator and staff buy-in. 14  

After the scope of the problem has been evaluated and the problem determined to be a priority, clinicians should review the current literature related to the problem. This step is still early in the QI process. During the literature review, look for background information to determine the characteristics of the problem, its prevalence at other centers, and factors that contribute to it. 15   After completing the review of the literature, the team can use a variety of critical thinking tools to assess the problem. Many hospitals have adopted formal programs such as Lean methodology or Six Sigma to assess and manage improvement efforts. For nurses working in hospitals without a formal QI model, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) has extensive free resources such as critical thinking templates, videos, and toolkits 16   ; these assets are available to educate nurses about the IHI’s improvement model, the Model for Improvement. The items in the toolkits can be combined to best suit the improvement need. Scoville and Little 17   suggest that no 1 method is superior to another and that a combination of tools that are specific to the problem, rather than to the QI method, might best serve patients.

Observations and Conversations

A foundation for any assessment is built from targeted, direct observations that qualified clinicians make at the point of care. Clinicians can gather important information by going into clinical units, watching care being delivered, and asking questions of the direct caregivers. The purpose of these observations and questions to staff is not to assign blame but to understand fully the factors that have led to the clinical problem. Observation of units that do not have the same problem can often yield important information that helps determine what factors contribute to those units’ relative success.

When observing a unit, team members may find that more than 1 factor contributes to the quality issue. For example, a nurse manager in a medical intensive care unit noted a high rate of central catheter–associated bloodstream infection. The nurse manager convened a team that included a nurse leader, a critical care medicine physician, staff nurses, an infection control nurse, and nursing assistants. After being assembled, the team decided to observe the process of a nurse caring for central venous catheters on the unit. One team member observed the nurse searching for equipment both in the patient’s room and on the supply cart while changing a dressing. The team decided to investigate the workflow further to determine whether the multiple interruptions to care resulting from the nurse obtaining supplies was routine on the unit or an anomaly. Conversations with staff confirmed that supply carts were inconsistently stocked, and the bedside carts did not always have the supplies necessary for dressing changes. The process in place for replenishing supplies seemed to be broken. In this case, improving workflow to increase efficiency was not the only intervention necessary to solve the unit’s multidimensional problem with central catheter–associated bloodstream infections, but it was the first step in improving it.

Improving the workflow to increase efficiency may be a first step in solving your unit’s problem .

Spaghetti Diagram

The team decided to complete a Spaghetti Diagram, a visual tool that allowed them to examine the flow of people within the unit to determine whether the layout or organization of supplies could be improved. The team’s goal was to use the Spaghetti Diagram to redesign the work and processes—in this case, the supply and bedside carts—on the basis of how staff completed the work. 18   To create a Spaghetti Diagram, the team started with a blank schematic of the area. They selected a nurse and recorded on the unit schematic that nurse’s movement from 1 area to another ( Figure 1 ). In addition, they recorded the nurse’s step count.

After counting the lines on the diagram and the steps the nurse took to gather supplies, the team noted an excessive number of trips to the supply area; this finding indicated that the restocking process needed to be improved. The observations also illuminated other workflow problems, such as the need to call frequently for more supplies on busy days or to leave the unit to obtain equipment. The team collaborated with the hospital’s central supply department to change the par stock and the location of items. A second Spaghetti Diagram created after the reorganization depicts improvements in workflow ( Figure 2 ).

After assessment, the next step in the nursing process, diagnosis, requires nurses to synthesize what they found during the assessment into information that is meaningful for patient care. For quality issues, after gathering the initial information, nurses attempt to determine all possible causes of the issue. Many nurses are familiar with root cause analysis (RCA), which The Joint Commission requires in response to a sentinel event. 19   The purpose of an RCA is to identify any system-related problems that may have contributed to the adverse event in question and to allow changes to be made that will prevent a similar event in the future. An RCA involves identifying what happened, what should have happened, and the causes of the adverse event. Through efforts of the National Patient Safety Foundation, standard RCA has been modified to include an additional A for “action plan,” changing the acronym to “RCA2.” 20   This change emphasizes the need to both identify the root cause and create sustainable improvements in care delivery to prevent future harm.

The components of the RCA2 include factors related to communication, the environment, equipment, processes, staff performance, the team, management, and the organization. The RCA2 leads teams to think critically about the event, to uncover the contributing factor(s) that precipitated it, and ultimately to make plans to mitigate the current problem and prevent similar events in the future. 21   Teams planning improvements related to sentinel events should collaborate with risk management to identify root causes and implement plans for mitigation. Fortunately, not all quality issues result in sentinel events, but in a learning culture, it is helpful for teams to consider less serious events and near-miss or “good catch” events as opportunities for improvement. 22   In addition to the RCA2, QI teams can use other tools to enhance critical thinking in relation to nonsentinel events, near misses, and good catches. Three critical thinking tools commonly used to diagnose quality issues are the 5 Whys, cause and effect diagrams, and Pareto charts.

The 5 Whys tool requires the team to examine the cause of a clinical problem in an attempt to discover the underlying cause; to do so, the team asks the question “Why?” 5 times. 23   Users must thoughtfully consider all aspects of the problem before deciding on a root cause. Often, what might initially seem to be the cause of a problem is actually only a symptom. Figure 3 shows an example of a 5 Whys process that was completed for a mucosal injury caused by an endotracheal tube holder. As seen in the figure, the initial cause of the injury was determined to be use of the wrong tube holder. The 5 Whys tool forced the team to search further for the root cause. At first, the use of the wrong tube holder seemed to be simply an error in nursing judgment; after completing the 5 Whys, however, the team determined the root cause of this problem to be poor communication about a newly stocked item.

The 5 Whys tool is useful for relatively simple problems. Not all problems require 5 steps, but users should attempt to fully explore causes in depth before ending the process. Alternatively, the exercise might require more than 5 steps. The strength of the 5 Whys tool is its ease of use; however, it may lead teams to oversimplify complex issues by suggesting that a problem arises from a single cause or that a search for a root cause will end after 5 steps. 24 , 25  

Cause and Effect Diagram

For complex problems, the 5 Whys tool might be inadequate or cumbersome. A Cause and Effect Diagram, also called a fishbone or Ishikawa diagram, helps clinicians examine complex clinical problems by considering that multiple causes may exist. This diagram has its roots in the manufacturing sector, and so the typical categories are materials, methods, equipment, environment, and people. 26   The categories, however, can be tailored to the specific problem. When completing a cause and effect diagram, enter the problem or adverse event in the “mouth” of the fish and work backward to identify causes within each main category. The 5 Whys method can then be used to determine a root cause within individual branches. The example in Figure 4 details the work of a team exploring the reasons for an increased number of catheter-associated urinary tract infections in the intensive care unit at their hospital.

Pareto Chart

A Pareto chart is based on the Pareto principle, which suggests that 80% of a problem stems from 20% of the causes, called the “vital few.” Identifying these vital few causes is intended to begin the improvement process by mitigating the causes of most of the events. The remaining causes—the “useful many”—can be fixed later. 27  

After examining the multiple causes of a quality issue, the team may need to determine which to tackle first. For example, the nurse manager in a surgical intensive care unit noted an increased number of pressure injuries and formed a team to investigate. While reviewing the types of pressure injury that occurred throughout the previous year, the team discovered numerous sites of injury, including heels, coccyx, hips, elbows, back of the head, ankles, face, and ears. The team created a Pareto chart to display visually the frequency and cumulative percentage of pressure injuries at each location. Figure 5 shows the Pareto chart the team created; 80% of the pressure ulcers were located on the heels and coccyx. On the basis of this information, the team decided to explore the literature about how to prevent pressure injuries on the heel and coccyx.

When planning what causes to mitigate first, a team should consider other elements of the Pareto chart, such as events in the “useful many” category that can be easily fixed. An early win for the team not only encourages them to continue but can help gain buy-in from leadership and staff. 3 , 14   In our pressure injury example, the team noted that all stage 3 pressure injuries were injuries to the ears and had been caused by respiratory equipment. 28   Although ear injuries were not represented in the “vital few,” their severity was a concern. The team decided to include prevention of pressure injuries from respiratory equipment as a priority, along with prevention of those on the heel and coccyx.

As with the use of any tool for patient care, nurses bring their own unique insights to solving problems. Although a Pareto chart can aid nurses in critically thinking about an issue, their knowledge of patient care should still inform practice decisions.

After the quality issue has been assessed and diagnosed, return to the nursing literature to find evidence-based best practices and potential solutions. Organizations such as The Joint Commission, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and many professional specialty organizations have published evidence-based practice guidelines and toolkits that are ready to be implemented in clinical practice. Such high-quality assets provide 1 way to ensure that interventions are based on evidence and are useful in practice, without requiring the team to reinvent the wheel and resynthesize the literature. 3  

To determine the quality of a clinical practice guideline, use the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. 29   This 23-item instrument is reliable and valid, and it is available online at no cost. It leads users through the evaluation of 6 quality domains: Scope and Purpose, Stakeholder Involvement, Rigor of Development, Clarity of Presentation, Applicability, and Editorial Independence. If the team determines that the guideline is of sufficient quality to use, a literature review should focus on identifying strategies to implement the guideline into practice. If no guideline exists, complete a standard review of the literature to find potential solutions.

Evidence Table

Teams should use evidence-based practice skills to critically appraise and synthesize the literature. An evidence table is an evidence-based practice tool that summarizes the relevant literature in just a few pages. 30   Common column headings in the table include the citation, purpose of the study, sample and setting, methods, results, and a rating of the level and quality of evidence. Create a separate entry for each study within the rows of the table. Once the table has been completed, use the information it provides to identify recommendations for practice that are based on the literature. Use the level of evidence and quality ratings of individual studies to determine the overall strength of the evidence. For example, practice recommendations from numerous experimental studies are considered stronger than recommendations from an equal number of nonexperimental studies, on the basis of the rigor of the study design. Similarly, if most of the articles are of high quality, the overall quality of the evidence can be rated as high. 31   When trying to obtain necessary support for a quality initiative from staff and leadership, the creator of the evidence table can easily share it with other team members, stakeholders, and administrators to provide a summary of the current evidence. 30  

Gap Analysis

Once the team has determined evidence-based practice recommendations, they should use a gap analysis, another evidence-based practice tool, to compare best practices with their organization’s current practice. A template with instructions is available online from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 32   ; this template can help teams summarize the practice gap. Column headings in the gap analysis table include best practice, best practice strategies, how your practice differs from the best practice, barriers to implementing the best practice, and whether the best practice will be implemented. For problems that are guided by hospital policy, a 2-step gap analysis may be required: the team first compares the evidence-based best practices with the policy and then compares the policy with care delivered on the unit. If the policy is not congruent with best practices, it should be revised to reflect current evidence as an initial step in the quality initiative.

Completing a gap analysis requires that users not only assess how a practice differs from evidence-based best practice, but also identify organizational characteristics that might affect the implementation of change. Factors such as readiness for change within the environment or the ability to engage staff can be either drivers of or barriers to change, and they should be considered in a gap analysis. When deciding whether to implement best practices, consider how the organization’s strengths and weaknesses influence the team’s ability to embark on a QI initiative. Alternatively, consider possible threats to the organization if the initiative is not begun. When the gap analysis has been completed and the team has determined what actions will be part of the QI initiative, it is helpful to clarify the vision for the initiative by formalizing its purpose and goals.

Project Purpose and Goals

A project’s purpose is directly related to the outcome that the team wants to achieve. For example, the purpose may be to improve patient safety by decreasing alarm fatigue among nurses. The project goals should flow directly from the gap analysis and target the best practices that are described in the literature but are missing from practice. For example, if the gap analysis for alarm fatigue noted that the unit lacked a standardized process for determining alarm limits, writing and implementing a policy for setting alarm limits would be a goal for the initiative.

Unfortunately, it is not always possible to implement immediately all the best practices noted in a gap analysis. In the alarm fatigue example, the team may have identified supply issues related to the quality of electrocardiogram electrodes, but implementation of the solution may need to be delayed as the team collaborates with members of the supply chain to evaluate options and select a new product. Other reasons for delaying full implementation might include financial limitations, inadequate staffing, or accessibility of equipment; however, making some progress toward improvement is usually better than waiting for perfect conditions before starting. 3  

Quality improvement requires an interprofessional team effort. Many models exist to guide the process of quality initiatives, including Lean methodology, Six Sigma, and the IHI’s Model for Improvement; however, QI remains the work of every nurse, and nurses can use the familiar nursing process in such initiatives. In this article we have provided an overview of 4 frequently used QI tools and 2 evidence-based practice tools teams can use in quality initiatives. When nurses use these tools in conjunction with their knowledge and expertise, they can help improve care delivery and patient outcomes.

To purchase electronic or print reprints, contact the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 27071 Aliso Creek Rd, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. Phone, (800) 899-1712 or (949) 362-2050 (ext 532); fax, (949) 362-2049; email, [email protected] .

Financial Disclosures

None reported.

To learn more about quality improvement reports, read “Blending Quality Improvement and Research Methods for Implementation Science, Part I: Design and Data Collection” by Granger and Shah in AACN Advanced Critical Care , 2015;26(3):268-274. Available at www.aacnacconline.org .

• Next Article

Data & Figures

Spaghetti Diagram for obtaining supplies used in changing the dressing for a central venous catheter. The observer captured the route the nurse took to gather supplies before the supplies had been reorganized. The diagram includes 8 lines. The nurse took 71 steps to gather the necessary items.

Spaghetti Diagram based on repeated observations after the supplies for changing central catheter dressings were reorganized so they were all available in supply room 1. This diagram includes 2 lines, and the nurse had to take just 33 steps to gather the necessary items.

The 5 Whys for an oral mucosal injury related to an endotracheal tube (ETT) holder.

Cause and Effect Diagram.

Pareto diagram showing pressure injuries by site. Values above each bar represent the number of pressure injuries.

Supplements

Email alerts, affiliations.

• About Critical Care Nurse
• CE Articles
• Individual Subscriptions
• Institutional Subscriptions
• Sign up for Alerts
• Submit an Article
• Online ISSN 1940-8250
• Print ISSN 0279-5442
• AACN Advanced Critical Care (ACC)
• American Journal of Critical Care (AJCC)
• Critical Care Nurse (CCN)
• AACN Membership
• Privacy Policy
• Advertising
• Permissions
• Tel: (800) 899-1712
• Tel: (949) 362-2000
• Cookie Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Get Adobe Acrobat Reader
• © Copyright 2024 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Clinical Nurse Educators' LibGuide

• Keeping up to date This link opens in a new window
• Recent articles from the Journal of Nursing Education and Practice
• Critical thinking and clinical reasoning
• LibGuides Homepage This link opens in a new window

Library support

Library staff can assist you with:

• Literature searching
• Research skills training and support
• EndNote training
• Advice regarding getting published
• Document delivery to obtain full text of journal articles 
• And more... see the  Library website

Contact or visit your local  CLIN Library  to find out more about our full range of services and for assistance with your research project.

Some articles on critical thinking in nursing practice

• Fero, L. J., et al. (2009). "Critical thinking ability of new graduate and experienced nurses." Journal of Advanced Nursing 65(1): 139-148. This paper is a report of a study to identify critical thinking learning needs of new and experienced nurses. Concern for patient safety has grown worldwide as high rates of error and injury continue to be reported. In order to improve patient safety, nurses must be able to recognize changes in patient condition, perform independent nursing interventions, anticipate orders and prioritize. Conclusion. Patient safety may be compromised if a nurse cannot provide clinically competent care. Assessments such as the Performance Based Development System can provide information about learning needs and facilitate individualized orientation targeted to increase performance level. © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
• Jacob, E., et al. (2018). "Development of an Australian nursing critical thinking tool using a Delphi process." Journal of Advanced Nursing. AIM To develop a critical thinking assessment tool for Australian undergraduate nurses. BACKGROUND Critical thinking is an important skill but difficult to assess in nursing practice. There are often many responses a nurse can make to a clinical problem or situation. Some responses are more correct than others and these decisions have an impact on a patient's care and safety. Differences in a response can relate to the depth of knowledge, experience and critical thinking ability of the individual nurse. DESIGN This study used a Delphi process to develop five clinical case studies together with the most appropriate clinical responses to 25 clinical questions. RESULTS Four rounds of Delphi questions were required to reach consensus on the correct wording and answers for the scenarios. Five case studies have been developed with nursing responses to patient management in rank order from most correct to least correct. CONCLUSION Use of the tool should provide confidence that a nurse has met a certain level of critical thinking ability.
• Ludin, S. M. (2017). "Does good critical thinking equal effective decision-making among critical care nurses? A cross-sectional survey."Intensive and Critical Care Nursing. v. 44 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2017.06.002 Background: A critical thinker may not necessarily be a good decision-maker, but critical care nurses are expected to utilise outstanding critical thinking skills in making complex clinical judgements. Studies have shown that critical care nurses' decisions focus mainly on doing rather than reflecting. To date, the link between critical care nurses' critical thinking and decision-making has not been examined closely in Malaysia.
• Simpson, E. and M. Courtney (2002). "Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review." International journal of nursing practice 8(2): 89-98. The need for critical thinking in nursing has been accentuated in response to the rapidly changing health-care environment. Nurses must think critically to provide effective care while coping with the expansion in role associated with the complexities of current health-care systems. This literature review will present a history of inquiry into critical thinking and research to support the conclusion that critical thinking is necessary not only in the clinical practice setting, but also as an integral component of nursing-education programmes to promote the development of nurses' critical-thinking abilities. The aims of this paper are to: (i) review the literature on critical thinking; (ii) examine the dimensions of critical thinking; (iii) investigate the various critical thinking strategies for their appropriateness to enhance critical thinking in nurses; and (iv) examine issues relating to the evaluation of critical-thinking skills in nursing.
• Turner, P. (2005) "Critical thinking in nursing education and practice as defined in the literature". Nursing Education Perspectives 26(5): 272-277. Critical thinking is frequently discussed in nursing education and nursing practice literature. This article presents an analysis of the concept of critical thinking as it applies to nursing, differentiating its use in education and practice literature. Three computerized databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and EBSCO) were searched for the years 1981 to 2002, using the keywords critical thinking. References were stratified into two 11-year periods (1981-1991, 1992-2002) to identify changes in the concept over time and integration of the concept differentially into nursing education and nursing practice. A random sample of literature from each stratum was coded for definitions, attributes, surrogate terms, referents, antecedents, and consequences of critical thinking. Critical thinking as a nursing concept has matured since its first appearance in the literature. It is well defined and has clear characteristics. However, antecedents and consequences are not well defined, and many consequences are identical to attributes and surrogate terms. Additional work is needed to clarify the boundaries of the concept of critical thinking in nursing.

Books on critical thinking and clinical reasoning

• << Previous: Recent articles from the Journal of Nursing Education and Practice
• Next: LibGuides Homepage >>
• Last Updated: Feb 8, 2024 2:18 PM
• URL: https://swslhd.libguides.com/CNE

Article C2121

Critical Thinking Tools for Quality Improvement Projects

Author(s): Kimberly Whiteman, DNP, RN, CCRN-K, Jason Yaglowski, BSN, RN, Kimberly Stephens, DNP, RN

Activity Message

Get ce message.

Contact Hours 1.00

CERP B 1.00

Expires Apr 01, 2024

Topics: Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement

Role: Educator, Staff

Add to Collection

Added to Collection

Activity Summary

Required reading for all learners: Implicit Bias impacts patient outcomes

• Describe how the nursing process can be used to improve the quality of nursing care.
• Identify the Institute for Healthcare’s Model for Improvement as a source of free resources for improving patient care.
• Explore a clinical practice issue using one of the described critical thinking tools: spaghetti diagram, 5 Whys, & cause and effect diagram.

Continuing Education Disclosure Statement

Learners must attend/view/read the entire activity, read Implicit Bias impacts patient outcomes , and complete the associated evaluation to be awarded the contact hours or CERP. No partial credit will be awarded.

Accreditation

The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses is accredited as a provider of nursing continuing professional development by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation.

Provider approved by the California Board of Registered Nursing, Provider number CEP 1036, for 1.00 contact hours.

Accreditation refers to recognition of continuing education only and does not imply AACN, ANCC, or CBRN approval or endorsement of any commercial products discussed or displayed in conjunction with this educational activity.

Any relevant relationship between an ineligible company and an individual with the ability to influence clinical content will be identified by the Nurse Planner within the activity. Any relevant relationship between an ineligible company and an individual with the ability to influence clinical content has been mitigated.

AACN programming meets the standards for most states that require mandatory continuing education contact hours for license and/or certification renewal. AACN recommends consulting with your state board of nursing or credentialing organization before submitting CE to fulfill continuing education requirements.

Continuing Education Activities are nonrefundable.

• ACN FOUNDATION
• SIGNATURE EVENTS
• SCHOLARSHIPS
• POLICY & ADVOCACY
• ACN MERCHANDISE
• MYACN LOGIN
• THE BUZZ LOGIN
• STUDENT LOGIN

• ACN governance and structure
• Work at ACN
• Contact ACN
• NurseClick – ACN’s blog
• Media releases
• Publications
• ACN podcast
• Men in Nursing
• NurseStrong
• Recognition of Service
• Free eNewsletter
• Areas of study
• Graduate Certificates
• Nursing (Re-entry)
• Preparation for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)
• Continuing Professional Development
• Immunisation courses
• Single units of study
• Transition to Practice Program
• Refresher programs
• Principles of Emergency Care
• Endorsements
• Student support
• Student policies
• Clinical placements
• Career mentoring
• Indemnity insurance
• Legal advice
• ACN representation
• Affiliate membership
• Undergraduate membership
• Retired membership
• States and Territories
• ACN Fellowship
• Referral discount
• Health Minister’s Award for Nursing Trailblazers
• Emerging Nurse Leader program
• Emerging Policy Leader Program
• Emerging Research Leader Program
• Nurse Unit Manager Leadership Program
• Nurse Director Leadership Program
• Nurse Executive Leadership Program
• The Leader’s Series
• Nurse Executive Capability Framework
• Thought leadership
• Other leadership courses
• Nursing & Health Expo
• National Nurses Breakfast
• National Nursing Forum
• History Faculty Conference
• Next Generation Faculty Summit
• Let’s Talk Leadership
• Virtual Open Day
• National Nursing Roadshow
• Policy Summit
• Event and webinar calendar
• Grants and awards
• First Nations health scholarships
• External nursing scholarships
• Assessor’s login
• ACN Advocacy and Policy
• Position Statements
• Submissions
• White Papers
• Aged Care Solutions Expert Advisory Group
• Nurses and Violence Taskforce
• Parliamentary Friends of Nursing
• Aged Care Transition to Practice Program
• Our affiliates
• Immunisation
• Join as an Affiliated Organisation
• Our Affiliates
• Our Corporate Partners
• Events sponsorship
• Advertise with us
• Career Hub resources
• Critical Thinking

Q&A: What is critical thinking and when would you use critical thinking in the clinical setting?

(Write 2-3 paragraphs)

In literature ‘critical thinking’ is often used, and perhaps confused, with problem-solving and clinical decision-making skills and clinical reasoning. In practice, problem-solving tends to focus on the identification and resolution of a problem, whilst critical thinking goes beyond this to incorporate asking skilled questions and critiquing solutions.

Critical thinking has been defined in many ways, but is essentially the process of deliberate, systematic and logical thinking, while considering bias or assumptions that may affect your thinking or assessment of a situation. In healthcare, the clinical setting whether acute care sector or aged care critical thinking has generally been defined as reasoned, reflective thinking which can evaluate the given evidence and its significance to the patient’s situation. Critical thinking occasionally involves suspension of one’s immediate judgment to adequately evaluate and appraise a situation, including questioning whether the current practice is evidence-based. Skills such as interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation are required to interpret thinking and the situation. A lack of critical thinking may manifest as a failure to anticipate the consequences of one’s actions.

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them.

The Paul-Elder framework has three components:

• The elements of thought (reasoning)
• The intellectual standards that should be applied to the elements of reasoning
• The intellectual traits associated with a cultivated critical thinker that result from the consistent and disciplined application of the intellectual standards to the elements of thought.

Critical thinking can be defined as, “the art of analysing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it”. The eight Parts or Elements of Thinking involved in critical thinking:

• All reasoning has a purpose (goals, objectives).
• All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve some problem .
• All reasoning is based on assumptions (line of reasoning, information taken for granted).
• All reasoning is done from some point of view.
• All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence .
• All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas .
• All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data.
• All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequence.

Q&A: To become a nurse requires that you learn to think like a nurse. What makes the thinking of a nurse different from a doctor, a dentist or an engineer?

It is how we view the health care consumer or aged care consumer, and the type of problems nurses deal with in clinical practice when we engage in health care patient centred care. To think like a nurse requires that we learn the content of nursing; the ideas, concepts, ethics and theories of nursing and develop our intellectual capacities and skills so that we become disciplined, self-directed, critical thinkers.

As a nurse you are required to think about the entire patient/s and what you have learnt as a nurse including; ideas, theories, and concepts in nursing. It is important that we develop our skills so that we become highly proficient critical thinkers in nursing.

In nursing, critical thinkers need to be:

Nurses need to use language that will clearly communicate a lot of information that is key to good nursing care, for handover and escalation of care for improving patient safety and reducing adverse outcomes, some organisations use the iSoBAR (identify–situation–observations–background–agreed plan–read back) format. Firstly, the “i”, for “identify yourself and the patient”, placed the patient’s identity, rather than the diagnosis, in primary position and provided a method of introduction. (This is particularly important when teams are widely spread geographically.) The prompt, “S” (“situation”) “o” for “observations”, was included to provide an adequate baseline of factual information on which to devise a plan of care. and “B” (“background”), “A” “agreed plan” and “R” “read back” to reinforce the transfer of information and accountability.

In clinical practice experienced nurses engage in multiple clinical reasoning episodes for each patient in their care. An experienced nurse may enter a patient’s room and immediately observe significant data, draw conclusions about the patient and initiate appropriate care. Because of their knowledge, skill and experience the expert nurse may appear to perform these processes in a way that seems automatic or instinctive. However, clinical reasoning is a learnt skill.

Key critical thinking skills – the clinical reasoning cycle / critical thinking process

To support nursing students in the clinical setting, breakdown the critical thinking process into phases;

• Decide/identify

This is a dynamic process and nurses often combine one or more of the phases, move back and forth between them before reaching a decision, reaching outcomes and then evaluating outcomes.

For nursing students to learn to manage complex clinical scenarios effectively, it is essential to understand the process and steps of clinical reasoning. Nursing students need to learn rules that determine how cues shape clinical decisions and the connections between cues and outcomes.

Start with the Patient – what is the issue? Holistic approach – describe or list the facts, people.

Collect information – Handover report, medical and nursing, allied health notes. Results, patient history and medications.

• New information – patient assessment

Process Information – Interpret- data, signs and symptoms, normal and abnormal.

• Analyse – relevant from non-relevant information, narrow down the information
• Evaluate – deductions or form opinions and outcomes

Identify Problems – Analyse the facts and interferences to make a definitive diagnosis of the patients’ problem.

Establish Goals – Describe what you want to happen, desired outcomes and timeframe.

Take action – Select a course of action between alternatives available.

Evaluate Outcomes – The effectiveness of the actions and outcomes. Has the situation changed or improved?

Reflect on process and new learning – What have you learnt and what would you do differently next time.

Scenario: Apply the clinical reasoning cycle, see below, to a scenario that occurred with a patient in your clinical practice setting. This could be the doctor’s orders, the patient’s vital signs or a change in the patient’s condition.

(Write 3-5 paragraphs)

Important skills for critical thinking

Some skills are more important than others when it comes to critical thinking. The skills that are most important are:

• Interpreting – Understanding and explaining the meaning of information, or a particular event.
• Analysing – Investigating a course of action, that is based upon data that is objective and subjective.
• Evaluating – This is how you assess the value of the information that you have. Is the information relevant, reliable and credible?

This skill is also needed to determine if outcomes have been fully reached.

Based upon those three skills, you can use clinical reasoning to determine what the problem is.

These decisions have to be based upon sound reasoning:

• Explaining – Clearly and concisely explaining your conclusions. The nurse needs to be able to give a sound rationale for their answers.
• Self-regulating – You have to monitor your own thought processes. This means that you must reflect on the process that lead to the conclusion. Be on alert for bias and improper assumptions.

Critical thinking pitfalls

Errors that occur in critical thinking in nursing can cause incorrect conclusions. This is particularly dangerous in nursing because an incorrect conclusion can lead to incorrect clinical actions.

Illogical Processes

A common illogical thought process is known as “appeal to tradition”. This is what people are doing when they say it’s always been done like this. Creative, new approaches are not tried because of tradition.

All people have biases. Critical thinkers are able to look at their biases and not let them compromise their thinking processes.

Biases can complicate decision making, communication and ultimately effect patient care.

Closed Minded

Being closed-minded in nursing is dangerous because it ignores other team members points of view. Essential input from other experts, as well as patients and their families are also ignored which ultimately impacts on patient care. This means that fewer clinical options are explored, and fewer innovative ideas are used for critical thinking to guide decision making.

So, no matter if you are an intensive care nurse, community health nurse or a nurse practitioner, you should always keep in mind the importance of critical thinking in the nursing clinical setting.

It is essential for nurses to develop this skill: not only to have knowledge but to be able to apply knowledge in anticipation of patients’ needs using evidence-based care guidelines.

American Management Association (2012). ‘AMA 2012 Critical Skills Survey: Executive Summary’. (2012). American Management Association. http://playbook.amanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2012-Critical-Skills-Survey-pdf.pdf   Accessed 5 May 2020.

Korn, M. (2014). ‘Bosses Seek ‘Critical Thinking,’ but What Is That?,’ The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/articles/bosses-seek-critical-thinking-but-what-is-that-1413923730?tesla=y&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12483389912594473586204580228373641221834.html#livefyre-comment Accessed 5 May 2020.

School of Nursing and Midwifery Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle. (2009). Clinical reasoning. Instructors resources. https://www.newcastle.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/86536/Clinical-Reasoning-Instructor-Resources.pdf  Accessed 11 May 2020

The Value of Critical Thinking in Nursing + Examples. Nurse Journal social community for nurses worldwide. 2020.  https://nursejournal.org/community/the-value-of-critical-thinking-in-nursing/ Accessed 8 May 2020.

Paul And Elder (2009) Have Defined Critical Thinking As: The Art of Analysing And Evaluating …

https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/paul-elder-2009-defined-critical-thinking-art-analyzing-evaluating-thinking-view-improving-q23582096 Accessed 8 May 2020 .

Cody, W.K. (2002). Critical thinking and nursing science: judgment, or vision? Nursing Science Quarterly, 15(3), 184-189.

Facione, P. (2011). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment , ISBN 13: 978-1-891557-07-1.

McGrath, J. (2005). Critical thinking and evidence- based practice. Journal of Professional Nursing, 21(6), 364-371.

Porteous, J., Stewart-Wynne, G., Connolly, M. and Crommelin, P. (2009). iSoBAR — a concept and handover checklist: the National Clinical Handover Initiative. Med J Aust 2009; 190 (11): S152.

Related posts

Planning your career 5 November 2021

Active Listening 4 November 2021

Ethical Leadership 4 November 2021

Evaluation of tools used to measure critical thinking development in nursing and midwifery undergraduate students: a systematic review

Affiliations.

• 1 School of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 2 Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
• 3 School of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
• PMID: 25817987
• DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.02.023

Background: Well developed critical thinking skills are essential for nursing and midwifery practices. The development of students' higher-order cognitive abilities, such as critical thinking, is also well recognised in nursing and midwifery education. Measurement of critical thinking development is important to demonstrate change over time and effectiveness of teaching strategies.

Objective: To evaluate tools designed to measure critical thinking in nursing and midwifery undergraduate students.

Data sources: The following six databases were searched and resulted in the retrieval of 1191 papers: CINAHL, Ovid Medline, ERIC, Informit, PsycINFO and Scopus.

Review methods: After screening for inclusion, each paper was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Tool. Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria and quality appraisal. Sixteen different tools that measure critical thinking were reviewed for reliability and validity and extent to which the domains of critical thinking were evident.

Results: Sixty percent of studies utilised one of four standardised commercially available measures of critical thinking. Reliability and validity were not consistently reported and there was a variation in reliability across studies that used the same measure. Of the remaining studies using different tools, there was also limited reporting of reliability making it difficult to assess internal consistency and potential applicability of measures across settings.

Conclusions: Discipline specific instruments to measure critical thinking in nursing and midwifery are required, specifically tools that measure the application of critical thinking to practise. Given that critical thinking development occurs over an extended period, measurement needs to be repeated and multiple methods of measurement used over time.

Keywords: Critical thinking; Evaluation; Measures; Midwifery; Nursing; Scales.

Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Publication types

• Systematic Review
• Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate*
• Educational Measurement / methods
• Midwifery / education*
• Nursing Education Research
• Reproducibility of Results
• Students, Nursing / psychology*

• Account Settings

FEATURED INSIGHTS

• Behavioral health
• Site-of-care shifts
• Specialty care
• State of the healthcare industry
• The workforce crisis
• Value-based care
• View all featured insights

RESOURCES BY SECTOR

• Digital health
• Health plans
• Hospitals and health systems
• Medical device
• Physicians and medical groups
• Purchased and professional services
• View all sectors

NEWS & INSIGHTS

• Daily Briefing
• Radio Advisory
• Advisory Board tools

PRODUCTS & SERVICES

• Research Membership
• Expert Support
• Advisory Board Fellowship
• On-Demand Courses
• Sponsorship

FEATURED CONTENT

Bold predictions for healthcare in 2024.

Get three predictions for how healthcare leaders must adapt and strategize to thrive in the evolving industry.

• AskAdvisory

Our direct-to-expert service is here to help you navigate your membership, our research, and your most pressing challenges in healthcare. No question is too big or too small.

The Critical Thinking Toolkit

Sixteen tools to enhance bedside nursing performance by focusing on five core components of critical thinking.

Is this content helpful?

Posted on December 21, 2017

Updated on March 17, 2023

We help leaders and future leaders in the healthcare industry work smarter and faster by providing provocative insights, actionable strategies, and practical tools to support execution.

• All Resources
• Our History
• Legal Disclaimer
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Don't miss out on the latest Advisory Board insights

Create your free account to access 2 resources each month, including the latest research and webinars.

Want access without creating an account?

You have 2 free members-only resources remaining this month remaining this month.

1 free members-only resources remaining this month

You've reached your limit of free monthly insights

Become a member to access all of Advisory Board's resources, events, and experts

Never miss out on the latest innovative health care content tailored to you.

Benefits include:

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.8(4); 2021 Jul

Factors associated with the critical thinking ability of professional nurses: A cross‐sectional study

Tuan van nguyen.

1 Faculty of Nursing and Medical Technology, Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Can Tho Vietnam

2 School of Nursing, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan Taiwan

Hsueh‐Erh Liu

3 Department of Rheumatology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Taiwan

4 Department of Nursing, College of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan, Taiwan

Associated Data

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

To measure the level of critical thinking among Vietnamese professional nurses and to identify the related factors.

A cross‐sectional design was used.

The total sample included 420 professional nurses. Data were collected from July to September 2019 in three public hospitals located in Southwestern Vietnam. The level of critical thinking was measured using the Vietnamese version of the Nursing Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice Questionnaire. The data were analysed using the independent Student's t tests, ANOVA, Pearson's correlation and regression analysis.

Most of the participants had a low (48.3%) or moderate (45.5%) level of critical thinking. Age, gender, ethnicity, education level, health condition, duration of working as a nurse, duration of working in the current hospital, having heard the term “critical thinking” and work position had an impact on the critical thinking ability. Work position and gender explained 11% of the total variance in critical thinking ability.

1. INTRODUCTION

Critical thinking is defined as the cognitive process of reasoning that involves trying to minimize errors and to maximize positive outcomes while attempting to make a decision during patient care (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al.,  2015 ). The importance of critical thinking in nursing practice has been identified in the literature (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Ludin,  2018 ; Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ; Yurdanur,  2016 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al.,  2015 ). The current nursing environment has become more complex and demanding, especially regarding the acuity and safety of patients and the rapid turnover rate of hospitalization. If professional nurses want to provide high‐quality care, critical thinking is required (Berkow et al.,  2011 ; Brunt,  2005 ; Fero et al.,  2009 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al.,  2015 ). Nurses are often the first‐line professionals to observe and provide direct care for patients. Therefore, critical thinking is a necessary skill for them to be able to analyse clinical situations in order to make fast and correct decisions (Lee et al.,  2017 ). More importantly, critical thinking can also improve patient outcomes by preventing habitual thinking that may lead to incorrect medication or procedures (Fesler‐Birch,  2005 ). The critical thinking ability of nurses can have an impact on the patient's safety, and it is a priority in educational programs for healthcare providers (Berkow et al.,  2011 ; Buerhaus et al.,  2006 ). We can identify those with poor critical thinking and provide in‐service education. Although critical thinking has been shown that is influenced by the experience and knowledge acquired during clinical practice (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al.,  2015 ), other personal information needs to be considered to clarifying. Therefore, it is essential to measure the levels of critical thinking and to identify the work‐related and personal‐related factors that influence the critical thinking of nurses.

2. BACKGROUND

The literature has identified that there is a relationship between leadership and positive patient outcomes, such as fewer medication errors and nosocomial infections, lower patient mortality and higher patient satisfaction (Van Dyk et al.,  2016 ; Wong,  2015 ). Alongside leadership, critical thinking is an important factor that supports the management. They can apply critical thinking skills in decision‐making and problem‐solving, and they can develop strategies that help staff nurses to improve their critical thinking ability (Van Dyk et al.,  2016 ; Wong,  2015 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). Thus, the ability to think critically is necessary for nurses because it will help them to effectively make decisions and to solve problems in practice.

Although the importance of critical thinking in nursing practice has been identified, a limited number of studies have been conducted in this population. Particularly, few hospitals have evaluated the critical thinking skills of nurses before employment or during the clinical competency evaluation (Lang et al.,  2013 ). By reviewing 90 articles to assess the current state of the scientific knowledge regarding critical thinking in nursing, Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., ( 2015 ) found that only 16 studies used working nurses as participants. Furthermore, Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., ( 2018 ) reported that few studies have explored the critical thinking ability of nurse managers (NMs). Moreover, several studies have identified that working nurses have a low (Lang et al.,  2013 ; Yurdanur,  2016 ) or moderate level of critical thinking (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Lang et al.,  2013 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). To the researchers’ knowledge, no studies have investigated this issue in Vietnam.

In order to improve the quality and safety of patient care, various types of professional nurses have been established, such as Registered Nurses (RNs), NMs and administrative assistants (AAs). RNs provide direct care to the patients, NMs are responsible for forwarding management and delivering expert clinical care for patients, and AAs are an integral part of maintaining the quality of patient care. The AAs perform administrative tasks (e.g. filing, taking meeting minutes and distributing them and undertaking regular reports) that help NMs to spend more time assisting staff nurses and taking care of patients (Locke et al.,  2011 ). Therefore, RNs, NMs and AAs need to cooperate to help patients to regain their health.

In Vietnam, professional nurses work in three different positions, which are NMs, general nurses (GNs) and AAs (Ministry of Health,  1997 ). Specifically, NMs are recognized as head nurses in Western countries, and their responsibilities are in charge of organizing and implementing comprehensive patient care and conduct a variety of administrative work (e.g. planning and assigning work to nurses, planning the acquisition of tools and consumables, checking care sheets, recording daily labour). GNs are similar to RNs in Western countries, and they provide direct and comprehensive care to patients. AAs perform administrative tasks (e.g. keeping records about the hospitalized and discharged patients, preserving medical records, managing daily medications). They also participate in patients care if necessary (Ministry of Health,  1997 , 2011 ). Although the roles of these three types of professional nurses are different, their final goal is the same to provide holistic care for patients. With the cooperation and effort of these three types of professional nurses, patients can recover. Therefore, more surveys are needed that examine these participants’ level of critical thinking and the associated work‐related factors.

Previous studies have also found that several personal‐related factors are associated with the nurses' critical thinking ability, which are age, gender, ethnicity, education qualification, working experience and shift work (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Feng et al.,  2010 ; Howenstein et al.,  1996 ; Lang et al.,  2013 ; Ludin,  2018 ; Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ; Ryan & Tatum,  2012 ; Wangensteen et al.,  2010 ; Yildirim et al.,  2012 ; Yurdanur,  2016 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). However, the relationships between the critical thinking ability and these variables are inconsistent. For example, age and critical thinking have been found to be positively correlated (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Ludin,  2018 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ), negatively correlated (Howenstein et al.,  1996 ) and not related (Lang et al.,  2013 ; Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ; Yurdanur,  2016 ). Gender and critical thinking have been reported with a statistically significant relationship (Liu et al.,  2019 ; Ludin,  2018 ) and no relationship (Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ; Wangensteen et al.,  2010 ). Level of education and critical thinking have been found in a positive association (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Ludin,  2018 ) and not association (Lang et al.,  2013 ; Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ). Year of experiences and critical thinking have been shown to be positively correlated (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Ludin,  2018 ), negatively correlated (Howenstein et al.,  1996 ) and not related (Lang et al.,  2013 ; Mahmoud & Mohamed,  2017 ). Those inconsistent findings indicated the relationships between the personal‐characteristics and the critical thinking ability of professional nurses need further exploration. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the level of critical thinking of professional nurses and to explore the work‐related and personal‐related factors. This is the first study to investigate this issue in Vietnam. The results of the current study will make a significant contribution to the literature because it will provide thorough descriptions of the critical thinking of professional nurses and its associated factors. Furthermore, the findings may be used as a baseline for nurse managers and nurse educators to propose further strategies to improve this ability in professional nurses.

3.1. Research design

A cross‐sectional design was used. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines were applied in this report (Von Elm et al.,  2014 ).

3.2. Setting and sampling

Data collection was carried out from July to September 2019 in three representative and major public hospitals located in the Southwestern region of Vietnam. These hospitals have the same organizational structure, role of treating, operation of professional nursing and provide similar quality of health care to people around that area. The total numbers of professional in these three hospitals nurses were around 1,200. Besides, our study has two steps. The first step was to translate the English version of the Nursing Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice Questionnaire (N‐CT‐4 Practice) into the Vietnamese version. In that step, we used data as a pilot study to estimate the sample size in the second step, which was reported here. Sample size calculation was done by the formula: n  = 1.96 2  × p × (1‐p)/0.05 2 , where p  = .46 came from the poor level of critical thinking among nurses in the first step and 0.05 indicated the acceptable margin of error (5.0%); 382 participants were required by this formula. An additional 10% of participants were done to adjust for potential failures such as withdrawals or missing data (Suresh & Chandrashekara,  2012 ). Therefore, in total, 420 participants were required for this study. Convenience sampling was conducted to recruit the sample. The inclusion criteria were the nurses' employed full‐time employment in the study hospitals. Participants who participated in step 1 or being absent during the data collection such as sick leave or delivering a baby were excluded. Participants were grouped in each hospital and received an envelope with all questionnaires. Then, researchers explained the research's purpose, benefits and risks to the potential participants and the procedure for ensuring confidentiality, and the voluntary nature of the participation. The informed consent form was signed immediately after they agreed to participate in this study. Then, the participants were required to complete the questionnaires in 20 to 30 min and to return them to the data collector.

3.3. Data assessment

3.3.1. sample characteristics.

This instrument collected data about the personal information and occupational variables. The personal information included age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, religion, education level and self‐rated health conditions. The occupational variables were the duration of working as a nurse, the duration of working in the current hospital, the duration of working in the specific position, having heard the term “critical thinking” or not, previous exposure to critical thinking training or education or not, and type of work position.

3.3.2. Vietnamese version of the Nursing Critical Thinking in Clinical Practice Questionnaire ((N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v))

The N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) was used to measure the critical thinking ability of the professional nurses. The original instrument (N‐CT‐4 Practice) was established and classified based on the four dimensions of the 4‐circle critical thinking model of Alfaro‐LeFevre (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2017 ). These four dimensions were personal; intellectual and cognitive; interpersonal and self‐management; and technical dimensions. The personal dimension has 39 items to assess the individual pattern of intellectual behaviours; the intellectual and cognitive dimension has 44 items to assesses the knowledge of activity comprehension connected to the nursing process and decision‐making. For the interpersonal and self‐management dimension, it has 20 items to analyse interpersonal abilities that allow for therapeutic communication with patients and health teams and to gain information that is associated with the patient in the clinical environment. The final one, the technical dimension, has 6 items to is concerned with knowledge and expertise in the procedures that are part of the discipline of nursing. This scale has 109 items that are rated using a four‐point Likert response format (1 = never or almost never, 2 = occasionally, 3 = often, and 4 = always or almost always), for example: “I recognize my own emotions.” (item 1); “I have the scientific knowledge required to carry out my professional practice.” (item 40); “I adapt information to the needs and capacities of the patient.” (item 84); “I possess skills in the use of information and communication technologies needed to produce optimal professional results.” (item 105). The total score is obtained from the sum of the 109 items. The scores range from 109–436, and they are categorized into a low level (score <329), moderate level (score between 329–395) and high level (score >395). The overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.96, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.77 (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2017).

The N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) was translated, and its psychometric properties were tested with 545 Vietnamese nurses. The results showed that the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) has acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and validity (content and construct validity). Particularly, the overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.98, with that of the four dimensions ranging from 0.86–0.97. The ICC was 0.81 over two weeks. The item content validity index was 1.0. Moreover, the goodness‐of‐fit indexes in a confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable values, which were χ 2 / df  = 2.87, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.059, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.063, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.73 and Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = 0.72 (T. V. Nguyen & Liu,  2021 ). Therefore, the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) can be used to measure the critical thinking ability of Vietnamese professional nurses.

3.4. Ethical considerations

This study conformed with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (Helsinki Declaration,  2013 ), and it was granted research ethics committee approval by the ethical review board of the first author's institution.

3.5. Data analysis

The data were analysed using SPSS for Windows version 23.0 (IBM Corp.), and both descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated. The level of significance for all analyses was set at < 0.05. First, descriptive statistics were employed to summarize the collected data. The continuous variables were described using the mean and standard deviation ( SD ), and the frequency and percentage (%) were used for the categorical variables. Next, independent Student's t tests, analysis of variance (with Scheffe's post hoc comparison) and Pearson's correlation analysis were conducted to explore the association between the critical thinking ability and the personal and occupational factors. Then, a multiple regression analysis using the stepwise method was performed to identify the predictors of critical thinking ability (Pallant,  2010 ).

4.1. Characteristics of the participants

A total of 420 participants completed the questionnaires; the characteristics of overall participants and subjects in each group are listed in Table  1 . Three groups of subjects were included, which were NMs (24.8%), GNs (49.8%) and AAs (25.4%), respectively. Regarding the personal variables, almost all participants were Vietnamese (96.7%), no religion (73.1%) and had good health condition (60%). Meanwhile, the comparison among each group showed that age ( F  = 9.89, p  < .001), gender (χ 2  = 6.48, p  < .05), marital status (χ 2  = 6.77, p  < .05) and education level (χ 2  = 147.38, p  < .001) had reached the statistical significance. Further analysis showed that the age of NMs was significantly older than subjects in both the GN and AA group, AA group had a higher ratio of that in the GN group, and the AA group had a higher ratio of married one than the GN group. For educational levels, subjects in the NM group had a higher ratio of bachelor and master degree, whereas the other two groups had a high ratio of diploma and associate degree.

Characteristics of the participants ( n  = 420)

Abbreviations: AA, Administrator assistant; CT , Critical thinking; GN, General nurse; NM, Nurses manager ; SD , standard deviation.

Chi‐square and one‐way ANOVA test; significant at * p  < .05; ** p  < .01; *** p  < .001.

Regarding work‐related factors, the characters of all participants and subjects in each group are also listed in Table  1 . The comparison of professional experience, such as duration of working as a nurse, duration of working in the current hospital, duration of working in this specific position and heard the terminology of "critical thinking" showed a significant statistical difference among the three groups ( p  < .001). They showed that NMs had a longer duration of working as a nurse (mean = 12.30, SD  = 7.12) and duration of working in the current hospital (mean = 11.6, SD  = 7.02) than the other two groups; GNs had the longest duration of working in the specific position (mean = 7.41, SD  = 6.21). More subjects in the NM group heard the terminology of "critical thinking" than subjects in the other two groups. However, none of the subjects had been exposed to critical thinking training or education. Furthermore, there was a positive correlation among age, the duration of working as a nurse, the duration of working in the current hospital and duration of working in a specific position ( r  = .78–.975, p  < .01).

4.2. Level of the critical thinking of the professional nurses

The mean of the total scores of the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) for all participants was 333.86 ± 40.22 (with the average score/item = 3.06 ± 0.37), the median score was 331 (interquartile range [IQR] = 311–359), and it ranged from 204–436, which indicates that they generally had a moderate level of critical thinking. Meanwhile, most of the participants reported a low (48.3%) or moderate (45.5%) level of critical thinking. Only 6.2% of the participants had a high level of critical thinking. Regarding the four dimensions of the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v), the average sum score was 119.52 ± 14.19 (with the average score/item = 3.06 ± 0.36) in the personal dimension, 136.38 ± 17.62 (with the average score/item = 3.10 ± 0.40) in the intellectual and cognitive dimension, 68.71 ± 12.65 (with the average score/item = 3.44 ± 0.63) in the interpersonal and self‐management dimension and 18.09 ± 3.01 (with the average score/item = 3.01 ± 0.50) in the technical dimension.

4.3. Work‐related and personal‐related factors associated with critical thinking ability

There were statistically significant associations between the critical thinking ability and some work‐related factors, such as work position ( F  = 23.30, p  < .001), duration of working as a nurse ( r  = 0.15, p  < .01), duration of working in the current hospital ( r  = 0.13, p  < .05) and having heard the term "critical thinking" ( t  = −2.48, p  < .05; Table  2 ). The findings indicated that NMs had higher scores than GNs and AAs. Moreover, nurses who had worked for a longer duration as a nurse or worked longer in the current hospital had a higher critical thinking ability. Meanwhile, those who had not heard the term "critical thinking" had lower scores than participants who had heard this term.

Association between the participants’ characteristics and the critical thinking ability ( n  = 420)

The bolded values indicate the level of statistical significance (with p < .05; p < .01; or p < .001) between the independent and dependent variables.

Abbreviations: SD , standard deviation.

There were statistically significant associations between the critical thinking ability and some personal‐related factors, such as age ( r  = 0.12, p  < .05), gender ( t  = 2.32, p  < .05), ethnicity ( t  = 1.97, p  < .05), education level ( F  = 7.45, p  < .01) and health condition ( F  = 3.14, p  < .05; Table  2 ). The findings indicated that the older nurses reported a higher critical thinking ability, and male nurses had a higher score than female ones. Vietnamese participants had higher scores than participants with other ethnicities. Participants with a bachelor's/graduate degree level of education had higher scores than participants with a diploma and associate degree level of education. Those with very good health had a higher score than participants who rated their health as fair/bad/very bad.

All of the statistically significant variables identified in the univariate analysis were selected as independent variables to determine the predictors of critical thinking ability. For the regression analysis, the categorical variables were first coded as dummy variables. The factors of having never heard of “critical thinking,” being an NM being male, being Vietnamese, having a diploma degree and being in very good health were selected as the standard factors. The results of the stepwise multiple regression method showed that there were only two predictors, namely the variables of work position and gender. Working as an AA or GN or being female can predict the critical thinking ability, and they accounted for 11% of the total variance ( F  = 17.12, p  < .001). This indicates that the AAs and GNs had a lower level of critical thinking than the NMs. Besides, when compared with male nurses, the female nurses exhibited a lower level of critical thinking (Table  3 ).

Predictors of the critical thinking ability ( n  = 420)

5. DISCUSSION

This study showed that the critical thinking ability of most professional nurses was at a low or moderate level. This finding is consistent with previous studies (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Lang et al.,  2013 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). Using the same tool, Zuriguel‐Pérez et al. ( 2018 ) found that the median score of the N‐CT‐4 Practice was 363 (IQR = 340–386) for clinical nurses in Spain. Our study found a slightly lower median score (331; IQR = 311–359) but it was still in a moderate level (range of score: 329–395). Although critical thinking is a relatively new issue in Vietnamese professional nurses, it is not a brand new concept. Certain elements have been included in the nursing curriculum and clinical practice (e.g. the nursing process, problem‐based learning, evidence‐based practice). Therefore, up to 66.7% of participants had never heard the term "critical thinking," but 45.5% still reported a moderate level when measured using the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v).

In Vietnam, clinical professional nurses are categorized into NMs, GNs and AAs with different job descriptions. Critical thinking ability has been identified as an important component for the high quality of care around the world, except in Vietnam. In order to identify this ability, we collected data from 3 hospitals in one region and grouped these data for analysis. Based on the comparison among NMs, GNs and AAs, it was found that NMs had a higher level of critical thinking than GNs and AAs. This can be explained by the fact that NMs have a higher age, work experience and high educational qualification than the other two groups. This result partially supports the finding that NMs report a slightly higher level of critical thinking than RNs (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). Critical thinking is a necessary skill for effective and efficient management. Evidently, at present, NMs with a high level of critical thinking create positive practice environments that can help the staff nurses to deliver high quality and safe patient care (Zori et al.,  2010 ). Therefore, all healthcare personnel needs to learn and apply critical thinking in order to conduct their work effectively and efficiently.

For clinical nurses, continuous in‐service education is very important to update their knowledge and skill of care. Literature found various factors associated with curriculum design and learning of critical thinking ability. Therefore, grouping subjects in the present study together in order to identify the related factors could help the development of further in‐service education of critical thinking ability effectively and efficiently. In this study, a statistically significant positive correlation was found between the critical thinking ability and age, the duration of working as a nurse and the duration of working in the current hospital. These findings are consistent with previous studies. For example, older nurses have a higher level of critical thinking than younger ones (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Chen et al.,  2019 ; Feng et al.,  2010 ; Ludin,  2018 ; Wangensteen et al.,  2010 ; Yurdanur,  2016 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ), and nurses with more experience report a better critical thinking ability than those with less experience (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Chen et al.,  2019 ; Feng et al.,  2010 ; Ludin,  2018 ). Older and experienced nurses are more mature in their way of thinking (Chen et al.,  2019 ; Ludin,  2018 ). Because there were statistically significant positive correlations among age, the duration of working as a nurse and the duration of working in the current hospital. This indicates that older nurses have a longer duration of working as a nurse or working in the current hospital so they have better critical thinking. However, the correlation between these factors and critical thinking in the current study is small; further explorations are suggested.

This study showed that there is a significant association between critical thinking ability and gender and ethnicity, which is also supported by the literature. Ludin ( 2018 ) found that female nurses reported a lower critical thinking ability than male nurses. Traditionally, females have generally had fewer opportunities to receive education and more difficulty asserting their rights during decision‐making than males in Vietnam (L. T. Nguyen et al.,  2017 ). Even today, the phenomenon of gender inequality still exists in certain areas in Vietnam. This traditional burden and the limited opportunities to practice in a clinical care setting might lower the levels of the female participants’ critical thinking. Ethnicity has a similar impact, as found in the present study. For example, it has been reported that Caucasian and Hispanic/Latino participants have a significantly higher critical thinking ability than African American participants (Lang et al.,  2013 ) and that Malaysian and Indian participants report different levels of critical thinking; nevertheless, only 0.9% of the participants were Indian (Ludin,  2018 ). However, in the present study, as almost all of the participants were Vietnamese (96.7%), the skewed distribution of the ethnicity might limit the generalizability of the results. In future studies, an equal distribution of ethnicity is strongly recommended.

This study also confirmed that those who had a bachelor's/graduate degree had a higher level of critical thinking than those who had a diploma or associate degree, even though the former had never heard the term "critical thinking." A vast amount of studies has found that education has a positive impact on the level of critical thinking (Chang et al.,  2011 ; Gloudemans et al.,  2013 ; Ludin,  2018 ; Yildirim et al.,  2012 ; Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2018 ). Meanwhile, this study found that participants who had heard the term "critical thinking" displayed a higher level of critical thinking than those who had not heard this term. Education might be the major reason for this variation. In the present study, only 40.7% of participants had a bachelor's/graduate degree. In order to promote their levels of critical thinking, it is necessary to arrange for them, to encourage them, to attend advanced education or to provide further content in the in‐service education.

In this study, participants with very good health had a higher level of critical thinking than participants who self‐rated their health as fair/bad/very bad. Health status does have an impact on work productivity, job performance, quality of care and extra learning (Letvak et al.,  2011 ). Thus, poor health limits their learning and critical thinking ability. This ability is an important predictor of real‐life outcomes (e.g. interpersonal, work, financial, health and education) (Butler et al.,  2017 ). Therefore, the causal effects between health and critical thinking ability need further exploration.

In the current study, only the female gender and the type of work position as an AA or GN were identified as predictors, and they explained only 11% of the total variance of critical thinking ability in the regression model. The uneven distribution of gender and work position might be the reason for the low variance. Even though the male was significantly less than the female, NM was fewer than GN and AA. More factors need to be included in further studies.

The limitations of this study include that it used a convenience sample from only three public hospitals located in the Southwestern part of Vietnam. This sample does not represent all professional nurses in Vietnam. The N‐CT‐4 Practice is the instrument with good psychometric properties specific for clinical practice and translated into English (Zuriguel‐Pérez et al., 2017), Persian (FallahNezhad & Ziaeirad,  2018 ) and Turkish (Urhan & Seren, 2019 ). Different points of the Likert response format were selected by tools to measure critical thinking ability. For example, the N‐CT‐4 Practice selected a four‐point Likert response and it was rated in frequency, such as 1 = never or almost never and 4 = always or almost always. However, a seven‐point Likert scale for the Critical Thinking Disposition Assessment (CTDA) was selected and rated in levels of agreement, such as 1 for very strongly disagree and 7 for very strongly agree (Cui et al.,  2021 ). Which response format can be more reprinting the characters of critical thinking ability? Further investigation is strongly suggested. Besides, the N‐CT‐4 Practice (V‐v) questionnaire has too many items that may lead to the boredom of the participants to answer and thus affect the accuracy of the results. Moreover, the collapsing of three distinctly separate groups of nurses into one group for most of the analyses lead to not showing differences in critical thinking and influencing factors among the three groups. These factors all limit the generalization of the present results. Based on these limitations, it is suggested that the use of nationwide systematic sampling and an international comparison are strongly suggested in further studies. Regarding the critical thinking questionnaire, it would be better to use the revised versions with fewer questions. Therefore, developmental and psychometric properties are suggested to shorten this questionnaire.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that most of the professional nurses had a low or moderate critical thinking ability. Certain personal and occupational variables were significantly associated with the level of critical thinking. Being male or working as an NM were statistically significant predictors of critical thinking ability, and they explained only 11% of the total variance.

The findings of this study indicate that it is necessary to develop strategies to improve the critical thinking ability of professional nurses. The critical thinking ability has been confirmed to be an essential factor for high‐quality health care that focuses on the quality of patient care and patient safety. Besides, providing more opportunities to pursue advanced degrees or enhancing the provision of in‐service education in hospitals that involves classroom teaching or web‐based learning is strongly recommended for this specific group of nurses. Consequently, the quality of patient care could be improved.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the expert panel, translators, research assistants, the hospitals and all of the clinical nurses who participated in this study. We are indebted to the study participants and would like to dedicate the research findings to improving the critical thinking ability of Vietnamese professional nurses in the future. No specific grant was received from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not‐for‐profit sectors.

Van Nguyen T, Liu H‐E. Factors associated with the critical thinking ability of professional nurses: A cross‐sectional study . Nurs Open . 2021; 8 :1970–1980. 10.1002/nop2.875 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

• Berkow, S. , Virkstis, K. , Stewart, J. , Aronson, S. , & Donohue, M. (2011). Assessing individual frontline nurse critical thinking . Journal of Nursing Administration , 41 ( 4 ), 168–171. 10.1097/NNA.0b013e3182118528 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brunt, B. A. (2005). Critical thinking in nursing: An integrated review . The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing , 36 ( 2 ), 60–67. 10.3928/0022-0124-20050301-05 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buerhaus, P. I. , Donelan, K. , Ulrich, B. T. , Norman, L. , & Dittus, R. (2006). State of the registered nurse workforce in the United States . Nursing Economics , 24 ( 1 ), 6. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butler, H. A. , Pentoney, C. , & Bong, M. P. (2017). Predicting real‐world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence . Thinking Skills and Creativity , 25 , 38–46. 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang, M. J. , Chang, Y. J. , Kuo, S. H. , Yang, Y. H. , & Chou, F. H. (2011). Relationships between critical thinking ability and nursing competence in clinical nurses . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 20 ( 21–22 ), 3224–3232. 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03593.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, F.‐F. , Chen, S.‐Y. , & Pai, H.‐C. (2019). Self‐reflection and critical thinking: The influence of professional qualifications on registered nurses . Contemporary Nurse , 55 ( 1 ), 59–70. 10.1080/10376178.2019.1590154 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cui, L. , Zhu, Y. , Qu, J. , Tie, L. , Wang, Z. , & Qu, B. (2021). Psychometric properties of the critical thinking disposition assessment test amongst medical students in China: A cross‐sectional study . BMC Medical Education , 21 ( 1 ), 1–8. 10.1186/s12909-020-02437-2 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Helsinki Declaration (2013). Ethical principels for medical research involving human subject . Helsinki Declaration. [ Google Scholar ]
• FallahNezhad, Z. , & Ziaeirad, M. (2018). The relationship between the quality of working life and critical thinking of nurses in Milad Hospital of Isfahan, Iran . Preventive Care in Nursing and Midwifery Journal , 8 ( 3 ), 62–68. 10.29252/pcnm.8.3.62 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Feng, R. C. , Chen, M. J. , Chen, M. C. , & Pai, Y. C. (2010). Critical thinking competence and disposition of clinical nurses in a medical center . Journal of Nursing Research , 18 ( 2 ), 77–87. 10.1097/JNR.0b013e3181dda6f6 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fero, L. J. , Witsberger, C. M. , Wesmiller, S. W. , Zullo, T. G. , & Hoffman, L. A. (2009). Critical thinking ability of new graduate and experienced nurses . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 65 ( 1 ), 139–148. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04834.x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fesler‐Birch, D. M. (2005). Critical thinking and patient outcomes: A review . Nursing Outlook , 53 ( 2 ), 59–65. 10.1016/j.outlook.2004.11.005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gloudemans, H. A. , Schalk, R. M. , & Reynaert, W. (2013). The relationship between critical thinking skills and self‐efficacy beliefs in mental health nurses . Nurse Education Today , 33 ( 3 ), 275–280. 10.1016/j.nedt.2012.05.006 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Howenstein, M. A. , Bilodeau, K. , Brogna, M. J. , & Good, G. (1996). Factors associated with critical thinking among nurses . The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing , 27 ( 3 ), 100–103. 10.3928/0022-0124-19960501-04 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lang, G. M. , Beach, N. L. , Patrician, P. A. , & Martin, C. (2013). A cross‐sectional study examining factors related to critical thinking in nursing . Journal for Nurses in Professional Development , 29 ( 1 ), 8–15. 10.1097/NND.0b013e31827d08c8 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, D. S. , Abdullah, K. L. , Subramanian, P. , Bachmann, R. T. , & Ong, S. L. (2017). An integrated review of the correlation between critical thinking ability and clinical decision‐making in nursing . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 26 ( 23–24 ), 4065–4079. 10.1111/jocn.13901 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Letvak, S. , Ruhm, C. , & Lane, S. (2011). The impact of nurses' health on productivity and quality of care . JONA. The Journal of Nursing Administration , 41 ( 4 ), 162–167. 10.1097/NNA.0b013e3182118516 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu, N.‐Y. , Hsu, W.‐Y. , Hung, C.‐A. , Wu, P.‐L. , & Pai, H.‐C. (2019). The effect of gender role orientation on student nurses’ caring behaviour and critical thinking . International Journal of Nursing Studies , 89 , 18–23. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.09.005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Locke, R. , Leach, C. , Kitsell, F. , & Griffith, J. (2011). The impact on the workload of the ward manager with the introduction of administrative assistants . Journal of Nursing Management , 19 ( 2 ), 177–185. 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01229.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ludin, S. M. (2018). Does good critical thinking equal effective decision‐making among critical care nurses? A cross‐sectional survey . Intensive & Critical Care Nursing , 44 , 1–10. 10.1016/j.iccn.2017.06.002 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahmoud, A. S. , & Mohamed, H. A. (2017). Critical thinking disposition among nurses working in puplic hospitals at port‐said governorate . International Journal of Nursing Sciences , 4 ( 2 ), 128–134. 10.1016/j.ijnss.2017.02.006 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ministry of Health (1997). Decision No. 1895/1997/QĐ‐BYT of the ministry of health on the promulgation of Hospital Regulations . Retrieved from http://vbpl.yte.gov.vn/van‐ban‐phap‐luat/quyet‐dinh‐18951997qd‐byt‐.1.2286.html
• Ministry of Health (2011). Circular No. 07/2011/TT‐BYT dated 26/01/2011 of the Ministry of Health on guiding on patient care in hospitals . Retrieved from https://kcb.vn/wp‐content/uploads/2015/07/TT‐07.2011.TT‐BYT‐ngay‐26.01.2011.pdf .
• Nguyen, L. T. , Annoussamy, L. C. , & LeBaron, V. T. (2017). Challenges Encountered by Vietnamese Nurses When Caring for Patients With Cancer . Paper presented at the Oncology nursing forum. [ PubMed ]
• Nguyen, T. V. , & Liu, H. E. (2021). The Vietnamese version of the nursing critical thinking in clinical practice questionnaire: Translation and psychometric evaluation . Nursing Open , 1–8. 10.1002/nop2.834 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS . Maidenhead. Open University Press/McGraw‐Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan, C. , & Tatum, K. (2012). Objective measurement of critical‐thinking ability in registered nurse applicants . Journal of Nursing Administration , 42 ( 2 ), 89–94. 10.1097/NNA.0b013e318243360b [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suresh, K. , & Chandrashekara, S. (2012). Sample size estimation and power analysis for clinical research studies . Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences , 5 ( 1 ), 7. 10.4103/0974-1208.97779 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ] Retracted
• Urhan, E. , & Seren, A. K. H. (2019). Validity and reliability of Turkish version of the nursing critical thinking in clinical practice questionnaire . University of Health Sciences Journal of Nursing , 1 ( 3 ), 147–156. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Dyk, J. , Siedlecki, S. L. , & Fitzpatrick, J. J. (2016). Frontline nurse managers' confidence and self‐efficacy . Journal of Nursing Management , 24 ( 4 ), 533–539. 10.1111/jonm.12355 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Von Elm, E. , Altman, D. G. , Egger, M. , Pocock, S. J. , Gøtzsche, P. C. , Vandenbroucke, J. P. , & Initiative, S. (2014). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies . International Journal of Surgery , 12 ( 12 ), 1495–1499. 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wangensteen, S. , Johansson, I. S. , Bjorkstrom, M. E. , & Nordstrom, G. (2010). Critical thinking dispositions among newly graduated nurses . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 66 ( 10 ), 2170–2181. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05282.x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wong, C. A. (2015). Connecting nursing leadership and patient outcomes: State of the science . Journal of Nursing Management , 23 ( 3 ), 275–278. 10.1111/jonm.12307 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yildirim, B. , Özkahraman, Ş. , & Ersoy, S. (2012). Investigation of critical thinking disposition in nurses working in public hospitals . International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology , 2 , 61–67. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yurdanur, D. (2016). Critical Thinking Competence and Dispositions among Critical Care Nurses: A Descriptive Study . International Journal , 9 ( 2 ), 489. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zori, S. , Nosek, L. J. , & Musil, C. M. (2010). Critical thinking of nurse managers related to staff RNs’ perceptions of the practice environment . Journal of Nursing Scholarship , 42 ( 3 ), 305–313. 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2010.01354.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuriguel‐Pérez, E. , Falcó‐Pegueroles, A. , Roldán‐Merino, J. , Agustino‐Rodriguez, S. , Gómez‐Martín, M. C. , & Lluch‐Canut, M. T. (2017). Development and psychometric properties of the nursing critical thinking in clinical practice questionnaire . Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing , 14 ( 4 ), 257–264. 10.1111/wvn.12220 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuriguel‐Pérez, E. , Lluch Canut, M. T. , Falcó Pegueroles, A. , Puig Llobet, M. , Moreno Arroyo, C. , & Roldán Merino, J. (2015). Critical thinking in nursing: Scoping review of the literature . International Journal of Nursing Practice , 21 ( 6 ), 820–830. 10.1111/ijn.12347 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuriguel‐Pérez, E. , Lluch‐Canut, M. T. , Agustino‐Rodríguez, S. , Gómez‐Martín, M. D. C. , Roldán‐Merino, J. , & Falcó‐Pegueroles, A. (2018). Critical thinking: A comparative analysis between nurse managers and registered nurses . Journal of Nursing Management , 26 ( 8 ), 1083–1090. 10.1111/jonm.12640 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Critical thinking definition

Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process, which is why it's often used in education and academics.

Some even may view it as a backbone of modern thought.

However, it's a skill, and skills must be trained and encouraged to be used at its full potential.

People turn up to various approaches in improving their critical thinking, like:

• Developing technical and problem-solving skills
• Engaging in more active listening
• Actively questioning their assumptions and beliefs
• Seeking out more diversity of thought
• Opening up their curiosity in an intellectual way etc.

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Critical thinking can help in planning your paper and making it more concise, but it's not obvious at first. We carefully pinpointed some the questions you should ask yourself when boosting critical thinking in writing:

• What information should be included?
• Which information resources should the author look to?
• What degree of technical knowledge should the report assume its audience has?
• What is the most effective way to show information?
• How should the report be organized?
• How should it be designed?
• What tone and level of language difficulty should the document have?

Usage of critical thinking comes down not only to the outline of your paper, it also begs the question: How can we use critical thinking solving problems in our writing's topic?

Let's say, you have a Powerpoint on how critical thinking can reduce poverty in the United States. You'll primarily have to define critical thinking for the viewers, as well as use a lot of critical thinking questions and synonyms to get them to be familiar with your methods and start the thinking process behind it.

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

We understand that it's difficult to learn how to use critical thinking more effectively in just one article, but our service is here to help.

We are a team specializing in writing essays and other assignments for college students and all other types of customers who need a helping hand in its making. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

• Select the topic and the deadline of your essay.
• Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the essay writing process you struggle with.
• Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.
• Select your prefered payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed essay writers , online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.