An Evaluation of the Processes of Integrating the Rational Drug Use Curriculum into the Bachelor of Nursing Science Program, Academic Year B.E. 2561

Main Article Content

กมลรัตน์ เทอร์เนอร์
เมทณี ระดาบุตร
นฤมล เหล่าโกสิน
สตรีรัตน์ ธาดากานต์
ลัดดาวัลย์ ไวยสุระสิงห์


 The objective of this study was to evaluate the process of integrating the rational drug use curriculum into the Bachelor of Nursing Science program, in Academic Year B.E. 2561, using mixed-methods research. 1) Quantitative data collection was conducted by online questionnaire from 86 nursing institutions. The sample included 1,052 administrations and nursing instructors who returned the questionnaire. 2) The qualitative data collection was performed using a focus group discussion with 50 administrations and nursing instructors. The interview guideline included 6 questions on learning experiences regarding Rational Drug Use (RDU). Quantitative data were analyzed using frequency and percentage, and content analysis was used to analyze qualitative data.

The quantitative and qualitative findings were consistent and showed that most nursing institutions had introduced policy, assigned responsible instructors for integrating and managing RDU courses, defined learning competencies of RDU, indicated courses and subjects on RDU, determined the objectives and learning outcomes of RDU, managed RDU courses based-on a student-center and used many evaluating methods related to RDU. This research suggests that the TNMC should support the institutions continually. Nursing education institutions should clearly formulate the RDU policy, develop nursing instructors in RDU, promote teaching methods on RDU, and clearly and continuously evaluate integrating the rational drug use curriculum.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
เทอร์เนอร์ก., ระดาบุตรเ., เหล่าโกสินน., ธาดากานต์ส., & ไวยสุระสิงห์ล. (2019). An Evaluation of the Processes of Integrating the Rational Drug Use Curriculum into the Bachelor of Nursing Science Program, Academic Year B.E. 2561. JOURNAL OF HEALTH SCIENCE RESEARCH, 13(2), 103-116. Retrieved from
นิพนธ์ต้นฉบับ (Original Articles)


1. O’ Neill J. Antimicrobial resistance: Tracking a crisis for the health and wealth on nations. [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Apr 12]. Available from: Publications.

2. Chantrapipat K, Fongthong T, Saokaew S. Effectiveness of the National Health Security Office’s Policy to Promote Rational Use of Antibiotics by Using Payment for Quality Performance. Thai Journal of Pharmacy Practice. 2017;9(2):499-515. (in Thai).

3. Chongtrakul P. Rational Drug Use in Primary care. 11th ed. Bangkok: Wanida Printing; 2017. (In Thai).

4. WHO. Medicines: rational use of medicines. Fact sheet No. 338 May 2010.

5. Rational Use of Drug Subcommittee. Teacher’s guide for promotion rational drug use. Nonthaburi: Food and Drug Administration, Ministry of Public Health, Thailand. 2017:1-8. (in Thai).

6. Thailand Nursing and Midwifery Council. Conclusion Integrating the Rational Drug Use Curriculum into the Bachelor of Nursing Science Program. [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 Mar 29]. Available from: https://www. tnmc. news/ 110/

7. Ministry of Education. Teaching system. [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 23]. Available from: /moe/ th/news/.php?NewsID=11195Keynews_research

8. Salam A. Input, Process and Output: system approach in education to assure the quality and excellence in performance. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science. 2019;14(1):1-2.

9. Suksan S. CIPP Model. [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2019 Sep 12]. Available from: https://www.

10.Stufflebeam DL. The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In: T. Kellaghan, DL. Stufflebeam eds International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Dordrecht. 2003(9): 31-56.

11. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Second edition. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: aspx?

12. Giorgi A. Phenomenology and psychological research. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Duquesne University Press; 1985.

13. Suebsook R, Siripirom W, Siribanpitak P. Management Strategies to Enhance Action Learning Abilities of Instructors in Nursing Schools. Kuakarun Journal of Nursing. 2017;24(1):7-27. (in Thai).

14. Sukim T, Pimoljinda T. The Implementation of Hospital Administrative Policy: A Case Study of Outpatient Department of Bangkok Hospital Network at The Kingdom of Cambodia. FEU Academic Rewiew Journal. 2016;10(3):143-54. (in Thai).

15. Rafique N, Sultan B, Ahmad S, Imran M. Teachers’ Role in Implementation of English Language Teaching Policies in Public Primary Schools of Rural Area in Punjab, Pakistan. Language in India. 2018; 18(4):252–60.

16. Punya A, Wattanatorn A, Kaewurai W, Pajanban P. The Development of Instructional Model on Small-Sized School. Journal of Education Narasuan University. 2013;5(4):96-104. (in Thai).

17. Lan WY. The effects of self-monitoring on students’ course performance, use of learning strategies. The Journal of Experimental Education. 1996;64(2):101.

18. Reece AJ, Butler MB. Virtually the Same: A Comparison of STEM Students Content Knowledge, Course Performance, and Motivation to Learn in Virtual and Face-to-Face Introductory Biology Laboratories. J Coll Sci Teach. 2017;46(3):83–9.

19. McCrory R, Putnam R, Jansen A. Interaction in online courses for teacher education: Subject matter and pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 2008;16(2):155–80.

20. Postareff L, Parpala A, Lindblom-Ylänne S. Factors contributing to changes in a deep approach to learning in different learning environments. Learning Environments Research. 2015;18(3):315–33.

21. Kadri HM, Al-Moamary MS, Magzoub ME, Roberts C, Vleuten CPM. Students’ perceptions of the impact of assessment on approaches to learning: A comparison between two medical schools with similar curricula. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:44–52.

22. Tongnuang P. Effects of student-centered teaching modules on learner knowledge and learner developments in pathophysiology subject among nursing students. Princess of Naradhiwas University Journal. 2553;2(1): 73-89. (in Thai).

23. Aziz S, Mahmood M., Rehman Z. Implementation of CIPP Model for quality evaluation at school level: A case study. Journal of Education and Educational Development. 2018;5(1):89–206.

24. Zhang G, Zeller N, Griffith R, Metcalf D, Williams J, Shea C, et al. Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and Assessment of Service-learning Programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach & Engagement. 2011;15(4):57–84.

25. Patil Y, Kalekar S. CIPP Model for school evaluation. Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language. 2014;2(10):2615-19.