Lakhasly

Table 1 gives details on the three hundred PAU nursing students included in the research.Students indicated a strong knowledge of the "Five Rights" of medicine administration (mean = 2.72) and comprehension of pharmaceutical storage and disposal (2.7). Nonetheless, knowledge diminishes somewhat on the identification of pharmacological interactions (2.59), the recognition of adverse reactions (2.56), and the understanding of legal implications (2.6). The aggregate knowledge score is 2.66, accompanied by a standard deviation of 0.35, indicating a reasonably high but imperfect comprehension of pharmaceutical safety.Table 3 evaluates how nurses students apply medication safety knowledge in practice. A 3-point scale is used. Students report the highest compliance with checking allergy history (average = 2.78), a critical safety step. Adherence to the "Five Rights" and noting side effects also score well (averages = 2.68 and 2.66, respectively).The location of residency did not markedly impact knowledge or practice, indicating that contextual influences may be less relevant than educational exposure and clinical experience.Table 5 delineates prevalent obstacles in the teaching and implementation of medication safety.A significant majority (66%) reported inadequate information, while 59% indicated anxiety over the administration of high-risk medications, and 58% noted irregular oversight from clinical instructors.Other problems include not knowing enough about how medications can interact with each other (42% of respondents) and not having any standard testing tools (32% of respondents), which shows that the program needs to improve both academic knowledge and practical testing methods.Table 6 offers insightful analysis of how well nursing students believe they are ready for handling pharmaceutical safety issues.Gender is significant in practice scores, with females achieving a higher average (2.72) than men (2.58), accompanied by a significant p-value (0.001); nevertheless, knowledge scores did not exhibit significant differences between genders.The findings indicate that the system encounters issues, such as the need for enhanced instructional support, methods to augment confidence, and a culture of problem-sharing devoid of punitive measures.Residency data reveals a fairly balanced distribution: 39% live in cities, 37% in villages, and 21.7% in camps, with a small minority (2.3%) from Bedouin communities.Lower scores appear in double-checking medication labels (2.59) and reporting errors or adverse drug reactions (2.60), which are vital safety behaviors but may be hindered by fear or lack of confidence.Table 1 provides more details about the characteristics of the participants.

Table 1 gives details on the three hundred PAU nursing students included in the research. According to the gender distribution, 55.3% of female students surpass 44.7% of male students. Eighty-three percent of them are over twenty years old, hence most of them are already far along in their college education. Over half (53%) are in their fourth year of education, indicating they have a lot of expertise with clinical practice. Moreover, only 14% are in their second year; 33% are in their third year. This indicates that the bulk of the respondents possess a reasonable level of expertise. Residency data reveals a fairly balanced distribution: 39% live in cities, 37% in villages, and 21.7% in camps, with a small minority (2.3%) from Bedouin communities. Table 1 provides more details about the characteristics of the participants. Table 2 evaluates nursing students' knowledge in many aspects of pharmaceutical safety using average ratings on a 3-point Likert scale. The highest average score (2.8) pertains to formal instruction on pharmaceutical safety, indicating that such educational exposure is highly prevalent. Students indicated a strong knowledge of the "Five Rights" of medicine administration (mean = 2.72) and comprehension of pharmaceutical storage and disposal (2.7). Nonetheless, knowledge diminishes somewhat on the identification of pharmacological interactions (2.59), the recognition of adverse reactions (2.56), and the understanding of legal implications (2.6). The aggregate knowledge score is 2.66, accompanied by a standard deviation of 0.35, indicating a reasonably high but imperfect comprehension of pharmaceutical safety.Table 3 evaluates how nurses students apply medication safety knowledge in practice. A 3-point scale is used. Students report the highest compliance with checking allergy history (average = 2.78), a critical safety step. Adherence to the “Five Rights” and noting side effects also score well (averages = 2.68 and 2.66, respectively). Lower scores appear in double-checking medication labels (2.59) and reporting errors or adverse drug reactions (2.60), which are vital safety behaviors but may be hindered by fear or lack of confidence. The overall practice level is 2.65, close to the knowledge score, suggesting that practical application closely follows theoretical understanding.Table 4 illustrates significant disparities across demographic categories. Gender is significant in practice scores, with females achieving a higher average (2.72) than men (2.58), accompanied by a significant p-value (0.001); nevertheless, knowledge scores did not exhibit significant differences between genders. Age significantly affected performance (p-value = 0.006), as students over 20 attained higher scores, maybe attributable to increased maturity or clinical experience. The academic year significantly influenced both knowledge and practice. Second-year students had the lowest scores, but third- and fourth-year students shown enhancement, suggesting that curricular advancement favorably influences both theoretical and practical skills. The location of residency did not markedly impact knowledge or practice, indicating that contextual influences may be less relevant than educational exposure and clinical experience.Table 5 delineates prevalent obstacles in the teaching and implementation of medication safety. A significant majority (66%) reported inadequate information, while 59% indicated anxiety over the administration of high-risk medications, and 58% noted irregular oversight from clinical instructors. More than half (54%) said they didn't have enough hands-on experience, especially with figuring out doses and giving them, and 46% were worried about what would happen if they reported mistakes. The findings indicate that the system encounters issues, such as the need for enhanced instructional support, methods to augment confidence, and a culture of problem-sharing devoid of punitive measures. Other problems include not knowing enough about how medications can interact with each other (42% of respondents) and not having any standard testing tools (32% of respondents), which shows that the program needs to improve both academic knowledge and practical testing methods.Table 6 offers insightful analysis of how well nursing students believe they are ready for handling pharmaceutical safety issues. Seventy-7% of the students clearly felt that further training in this field was absolutely necessary. This result is consistent with other studies showing that many medical students feel unprepared and lack confidence in their knowledge and abilities connected to drugs. While 23% of respondents thought their preparation was largely sufficient, just a tiny percentage (18.7%) felt their present knowledge and practical experience were sufficient. Especially, the biggest portion of students 42.7% rated their preparedness as only "fair," and 14.7% stated they were not at all ready. This degree of self-awareness supports the need of carrying out focused educational interventions and matches the discrepancies in past objective evaluations. To guarantee that nursing students are better ready for safe practice in real-world healthcare environments, the findings underline the importance of organized drug safety training encompassing simulation activities, clinical mentoring, and competency-based assessments.