Table 6.

Comparison of control and project group, after training session.

	Total  N = 160			CG  n = 79			PG  n = 81			Mann–Whitney  U test,  (2-tailed)
	n (%)	Mean	SD	n (%)	Mean	SD	n (%)	Mean	SD	Z	p
Before the training session I was well prepared by reading the PCPN	154 (96)	3.36	1,181	76 (96)	3.49	1,172	78 (96)	3.23	1,183	1,377	.169
The training session was organized in a good way	154 (96)	3.72	.889	76 (96)	4.13	.525	78 (96)	3.32	.987	5,521	.000
I discovered during the session that I should have prepared myself better	153 (96)	3.31	1,096	76 (96)	3.07	1,112	77 (95)	3.55	1,033	2472	.013
Students in my group used the training time effectively	153 (96)	4.24	.744	75 (95)	4.29	.693	78 (96)	4.19	.790	−.685	.493
I'm confident that I will master the bed bath with a real patient in clinical practice	154 (96)	4.05	.851	76 (96)	4.17	.700	78 (96)	3.92	.964	1,466	.143
The training session made me want to seek more knowledge about the procedure	154 (96)	3.81	.831	76 (96)	3.74	.789	78 (96)	3.88	.868	1,380	.168
It's my responsibility as a student to practice the procedures until practiced	154 (96)	4.65	.578	76 (96)	4.67	.551	78 (96)	4.63	.605	−.400	.689
Training sessions in the laboratory is a good way to prepare oneself for clinical practice	154 (96)	4.82	.414	76 (96)	4.87	.377	78 (96)	4.78	.446	1,433	.152

Scale: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = unsure, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree.