Literature Review: Effective Approaches For An Educational Talk

1.0 Introduction

Existing literature acknowledges that stroke survivor caregiver education has become an essential element of contemporary practices where patients and their families are requested to assume more responsibility in care. According to Reed et al. (2010), a significant part of the progress focused on this education is attributed to the increasing fixation on matters such as cost-containment and shortened hospital stays. Unfortunately, despite the emphasis, the current pool of data on effective teaching methods depicts limited literature on how the stakeholders involved can better deliver educational formats and/or approaches for community-dwelling post-stroke survivors and their caregivers. Nonetheless, the limited literature, combined with other general publications focused on areas such as physical and occupational therapy in Geriatrics and patient education and counseling presents invaluable information. Therefore, this review focuses on effective methods for the delivery of educational formats and approaches for communities dwelling on post-stroke survivors and their caregivers.

1.1 Effective Teaching Methods

Using the taxonomy of the Nursing Interventions Classification, Hafsteinsdóttir et al. (2011) differentiate patient information and patient education by highlighting that patient information is concerned with the facilitation of communication regarding healthcare. On the other hand, patient education comprises interventions that enable edification for both individual patients and caregivers, families and groups or communities (Du et al., 2016). Similarly, Mudzi (2010) defines patient education as a calculated experience that utilizes the amalgamation of teaching, counseling and behavior alteration methods to affect the knowledge and health conduct of a patient. Therefore, based on this understanding, several efficient methods for an education talk are apparent from existing literature. 

1. Interactive Delivery

As explained by Wright et al. (2022), the work of Bonwell and Eison in 1991 contributed to the institution of the phrase ‘active learning’. However, it can be deceptive given that when a person learns something, they are deemed to have been active to some extent, especially mentally. Moreover, Wright et al. (2022) highlight that ‘passive learning’ does not exist hence the existence of a universal preference for the terminology ‘interactive learning’, which constitutes all approaches of purposeful engagement with resources used to aid those learning through consistent interactions. Therefore, interactive learning is linked to my benefits for those involved. Eames et al. (2011) explore the concept of interactive learning from a perspective that assesses its effectiveness in the conveyance of different stroke information topics. From their analysis, interactive learning alludes to delivery styles that advocate for the active participation of those receiving the knowledge (Eames et al., 2011). For instance, it could entail participating in discussions, hands-on training, and self-management, which are recommended over other inert approaches such as written information alone or didactic approaches. On the other hand, guided by their primary objective, the study by Eames et al. (2011) found that patients and caregivers had a heightened preference for education delivery styles that combined active and inert delivery styles across all the stroke topics presented. Moreover, community-based services increasingly advocated for the use of interactive delivery and extensive deliberations about written information as the effective method for presenting stroke information to patients and their caregivers. Subsequently, based on these findings and previous insight from general health and stroke-specific education literature, they recommended interactive delivery over other common styles such as didactic teaching methods. Nonetheless, Eames et al. (2011) also conveyed a reservation by citing that more studies were required for the assessment of the suitability of interactive delivery for stroke patients and their caregivers. 

1. Collaborative Learning

From a general perspective, collaborative learning is understood as the educational approach or teaching method of utilizing groups in the enhancement of learning through working together. Laal and Ghodsi (2017) describe that collaborative learning involves groups of two or multiple learners working together to comprehend new concepts, solve issues, or complete tasks. Moreover, the approach actively involves learners to comprehend and synthesize of information and conceptions instead of using rote memorization of information. Moreover, in the research conducted by Reed et al. (2020) and Clark et al. (2020), collaborative learning that demonstrates cooperation is strongly linked with positive outcomes that could be hard to attain through individualistic efforts. For instance, it can contribute to higher performance and significant productivity based on the increased care, support, and committed relationships established. Moreover, Laal and Ghodsi (2017) also highlight advantages such as substantial psychological health, self-esteem, and social competence. Notably, in the healthcare setting, several studies have assessed the impact of collaborative learning as a teaching method for stroke patients and caregivers. In the experiment conducted by Louie et al. (2006), the findings were consistent with those of past studies that stroke education groups contributed to the increase in the stroke-related knowledge of patients and their caregivers.

Even so, Louie et al. (2006) also acknowledge that the collaborative learning approach failed in meeting the set standards for an improvement in perceived health status and caregiving stress. These concerns are also presented by Laal and Ghodsi (2017) who state that collaborative learning exposes individuals to a heightened likelihood of consuming information based on the actions of others. Such associations can be detrimental because a person’s actions could either promote the success of others or serve as an obstruction. In rare cases, it does not have any impact on success or failure due to the inexistence of any dependence. Nevertheless, collaborative learning could also contribute to working against each other, from a competitive standpoint, which can significantly affect the realization of the desired outcomes.