Skip to main content
Download PDF

Integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice as perceived by undergraduate students and registered nurses: a scoping review

BMC Nursing volume 22, Article number: 270 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Objective

The current study aimed to determine perceptions of registered and student nurses regarding the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice.

Methods

This scoping review was conducted following the checklist provided in the Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews. Articles published in PubMed, ERIC, and CINAL from January 1, 2002 to September 30, 2022 were included.

Results

A literature review of 20 articles that matched the indicative criteria revealed that both undergraduate student and registered nurses recognized knowledge of anatomy and physiology as important to nursing practice. Student nurses recognized that such knowledge is related to understanding patient pathophysiology, patient observation, treatment selection, and patient safety and forms the basis for nursing practice. Registered nurses who were confident in their knowledge of anatomy and physiology also reported that they were able to explain the rationale for their nursing practice. They also reported that this knowledge is necessary for communication with multiple professions, which promotes patient/family trust in nurses and is the basis for building trusting relationships with patients and their families.

Conclusions

Although undergraduate student and registered nurses recognized the importance of learning anatomy and physiology, the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice was not the same for all student and registered nurses. This suggests the need to investigate the overall perceptions of nurses regarding the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice and for faculty to discuss how to facilitate critical thinking among students.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The exponential growth of information in health care knowledge and the complexity of medical sciences have required clinical nurses to be not only skillful but also knowledgeable on the scientific basis of diseases and treatment [1]. Knowledge regarding anatomy and physiology is essential for understanding human beings and is of great importance in nursing practice, especially in clinical decision making [2]. A qualitative research study by Van Wissen et al. [3], which sought to determine the impact of studying anatomy and physiology at a postgraduate level by disseminating pre- and post-course semi-structured questionnaire for an anatomy and physiology course as part of a Master’s Degree Program in Nursing, revealed improvement in confidence, particularly in communication, linking nursing theoretical knowledge to practice, and clinical nursing knowledge. However, with only a few published studies have been available regarding this field of research in undergraduate student nurses [4]. The overall view regarding how knowledge of anatomy and physiology relates to nursing practice remains unclear. This leads us to believe that faculty members teaching anatomy and physiology may not have a clearly defined perspective on student achievement goals for their anatomy and physiology courses. Student nurses seem to exhibit better academic performance level when they are well prepared and can understand the relevance of anatomy and physiology in nursing practice [4]. However, student nurses have perceived anatomy and physiology courses to be much more difficult than other subjects [5].

Studies have shown the effectiveness of blended learning, flipped learning, and other teaching methods in anatomy and physiology education. Blended learning has been reported to improve nursing students’ performance in anatomy and physiology, self-reported learning outcomes, and high levels of satisfaction [6]. The benefits of blended learning include flexible study time and improved independent study skills [7]. A study on flipped learning showed that the results for the flipped classroom group exceeded those for the traditional lecture group, with 70% of the student nurses reporting satisfaction with the flipped classroom method, indicating that it enhanced their learning and increased their interest in the course [8]. However, the primary focus of these teaching methods is not so much on promoting thinking that relates anatomy and physiology knowledge to nursing practice, but rather on how to consolidate anatomy and physiology knowledge.

With the current approach toward anatomy and physiology education, there is a need to examine educational methods that integrate anatomy and physiology knowledge into nursing practice and evaluate the effectiveness of such methods. As such, it is necessary to (1) investigate how students and nurses perceive anatomy and physiology learning and the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice and (2) define the achievement goals of anatomy and physiology education required by students enrolled in a bachelor’s program.

The nursing education system in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, among other countries, have included anatomy and physiology under bioscience, an umbrella term that includes anatomy, genetics, microbiology, physiology, pharmacology, and pathophysiology [9]. However, given that other countries use the term anatomy and physiology, this term was used in the current study.

Scoping review objective

This scoping review aimed to summarize the perceptions of undergraduate student and registered nurses on anatomy and physiology learning and the integration of anatomy and physiology learning and nursing practice.

Scoping review question

What are the perceptions of student and registered nurses on learning anatomy and physiology? What are the perceptions of undergraduate student and registered nurses on the integration of anatomy and physiology learning and nursing practice in undergraduate nursing education?

Methods

Protocol and registration

The review protocol for this study was not published. This scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews PRISMA-ScR Checklist [10] and follows the five-strategy review process as identified [11] and later refined by Lavec [12] and Peters [13].

Eligibility criteria

Titles/abstracts and full texts were screened to optimize literature coverage using the eligibility criteria shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Full size table

Reviews, brief reports, conference notes/abstracts, and comment articles were excluded. Studies that focused on the perceptions of nurses and student nurses regarding anatomy and physiology learning and those on the perceptions of nurses and student nurses about integrating anatomy and physiology learning into nursing practice were considered eligible. Papers that did not fit these criteria were excluded.

Information sources

An electronic search of PubMed, ERIC, and CINAL was conducted in October 2022.

Search

The search terms used were “nurse,” “nursing,” “anatomy,” “physiology,” “bioscience,” and “student.” Using Boolean combinations of the primitives, our final string was (nurse or nursing) AND (anatomy or physiology or bioscience) AND student.

Because nursing education curricula have changed with changing social conditions, in order to analyze the most recent research findings, the period of publication was limited to the last 10 years, and articles were limited to those published between January 1, 2002 and September 31, 2022. Although it is strongly recommended that scoping reviews should not be limited by language selection criteria [11], they were included in the exclusion criteria for this study due to the extreme difficulty of translating and understanding non-English speaking nurse education curricula. The seven excluded articles were in Chinese, Portuguese, and Israeli.

Data charting process and items

Microsoft Excel spreadsheets were used by the lead author to chart the characteristics of all articles. Table 2 was developed to chart the following key information from the selected articles: author(s) and year of publication, sample, objective, methodology, summary of findings, and country. Data from each included article were extracted by an independent researcher and counter-evaluated for accuracy or missing information by another researcher. Selected data with counter-information were re-evaluated by the entire team, after which a consensus was reached by the team to regarding the final charted data.

Table 2 Student’ and Nurses’ perceptions of anatomy and physiology (A&P) learning and integrating A&P learning into nursing practice
Full size table

Data synthesis

A scoping review was employed to identify all relevant literature, followed by a narrative synthesis. Due to heterogeneity across studies and even within studies with similar methodologies, metasynthesis for qualitative data was not possible. Instead, studies were combined to summarize the study characteristics, followed by a textual narrative synthesis. This approach helped arrange disparate study types into more homogenous subgroups, thereby aiding in the synthesis of different types of evidence. Study characteristics, context, quality, and findings have been reported according to a standard format, and their similarities and differences have been compared across studies [14].

Results

Search outcomes

Search results were exported to the bibliographic software program EndNote (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA). Duplicate articles were removed using the literature management software. Data were extracted from the literature management software to Microsoft Excel. Then, two researchers (MH and TF) independently extracted data from the titles and abstracts based on our eligibility criteria. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion between the two authors. Figure 1 presents the PRISMA flowchart [15] for the study selection process. A total of 2,839 papers were obtained, from which 220 duplicates were eliminated. The number of papers subjected to the title and abstract review was 2619, and the number of papers excluded from title and abstract review was 2571. Further screening of the full text of the remaining 48 articles resulted in the exclusion of 28 articles that were either not original papers or were unrelated to anatomy and physiology education. The excluded papers included 14 nonoriginal reports, 13 cadaveric dissections, and 1 patient simulation. Finally, 20 articles met the inclusion criteria (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram for the study search and selection process (diagram based on that of Page et al. [15])

Full size image

A total of nine studies were from Australia; three from the UK; three from New Zealand; and one each from Norway, Korea, Ireland, Scotland, and the USA. Among the 20 articles reviewed, 3 were qualitative, 11 were quantitative, and 6 were mixed methods studies. The study participants were registered nurses in 7 papers and undergraduate student nurses in 13 papers.

Study of anatomy and physiology

Impressions of undergraduate student nurses on anatomy and physiology were as follows: there was much content to learn [16], it was difficult [16, 17], and it required a considerable amount of study time [9, 18]. In addition, Montayre [19] reported that the perceived difficulty of anatomy and physiology was replaced by positive perceptions in the final year. The impressions of registered nurses on anatomy and physiology were as follows: courses in anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology were rated as particularly high priority for learning in the education of student nurses [1]. However, 40.5% of registered nurses perceived that their anatomy and physiology classes as students were not compatible with actual nursing practice [20].

Effective learning as perceived by undergraduate student nurses was reported as independent study [17], class attendance [21, 22], active participation in class [21], use of office hours [21], and use of core textbooks [22]. One study reported that understanding the content was important, not memorizing it [21]. Collaborative classes between anatomy and physiology faculty and nursing specialty area faculty [23], as well as collaborative learning opportunities between field placement sites and the university [24], were evaluated highly by the students. Registered nurses agreed that the study of anatomy and physiology should be extended to the final year of undergraduate study [25].

Undergraduate student nurses with high self-efficacy were more science-oriented and had higher expectations for success in the bioscience course than were students with low self-efficacy [26]. Several students had anxiety about studying bioscience [16, 27]. However, Mortimer-Jones [28] reported no significant difference in anxiety scores between bioscience and clinical classes.

Several registered nurses perceived their knowledge as low [29] and considered their anatomy and physiology knowledge inadequate for conducting the nursing process, communicating with other health care professionals, and teaching patients [30]. Registered nurses also indicated that they lacked confidence in explaining their knowledge of anatomy and physiology as evidence of nursing practice [25] and wanted to develop more knowledge of these topics [9, 25].

Integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice

Undergraduate student nurses [18, 31] and registered nurses [22, 25] recognized that knowledge of anatomy and physiology was important to nursing practice. The students recognized that such knowledge was important for understanding patient pathophysiology, patient observation, treatment selection, and patient safety [31] and that it forms the basis for nursing practice [9]. Registered nurses who were confident in their anatomy and physiology knowledge were also capable of explaining the rationale for their nursing practice. They also reported that this promotes patients/family trust in nurses, which they perceived as the basis for building trust with patients and their families [31]. In addition, registered nurses’ knowledge of anatomy and physiology gave them the confidence to serve as preceptors who influence students’ practice [32], and practice instructors with sufficient knowledge were able to provide students with opportunities to integrate that knowledge with their nursing practice [33].

Discussion

Summary of evidence

This review summarized the perceptions of undergraduate student and registered nurses on anatomy and physiology education in undergraduate nursing programs, as well as their perceptions on the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice. The diversity of assessment methods among the 20 studies, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods, may have affected the aggregated data.

Establishment of anatomy and physiology knowledge

Although undergraduate student nurses initially perceived anatomy and physiology as difficult [16, 17], this perception changed for the better in their final year [19] given that clinical practice allowed students to use their knowledge of anatomy and physiology to sharpen their critical thinking skills and clinical judgments [19].

Encouraging class participation [21, 22], use of office hours [17], and independent study is important so that students’ learning is not hindered by their impression that learning anatomy and physiology is difficult and their learning continues throughout their final year of study [25]. With regard to continuity of learning, Spencer [34] believes that continuity of learning, for example, in the training of physicians, will deepen students’ understanding of clinical medicine and how anatomy and physiology and specialized subjects are integrated. Additionally, reports have shown the effectiveness of collaborative teaching between faculty teaching anatomy and physiology and those faculty teaching specialized nursing courses [23]. Anatomy and physiology are often taught by a diverse group of faculty members, including clinicians, instructors from non-nursing colleges, and instructors with national nursing certifications, several of whom have no experience in clinical nursing practice [35]. As such, some classes are taught without an understanding of how anatomy and physiology relate to nursing practice. However, studies have shown that when anatomy and physiology is taught by nationally certified nursing faculty, students’ knowledge of anatomy and physiology was insufficient, and that such students would likely not understand basic anatomy and physiology knowledge of diseases and disorders when taking clinically oriented nursing courses [36]. Given that anatomy and physiology courses importantly serve as the foundation for nursing practice, collaboration between faculty members in charge of anatomy and physiology courses and those in charge of specialized subjects should be required based on the curriculum of each university. In addition, it is important for faculty members in charge of teaching anatomy and physiology to exchange information with faculty members of other universities in order to share effective methods for teaching the course.

Collaboration with clinical nursing instructors

Integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice is best achieved through clinical practice experiences. Furthermore, studies have reported that students’ thought processes are enhanced in clinical practice settings wherein the clinical instructor has sufficient knowledge of anatomy and physiology [24]. For students to learn effectively, the cooperation of not only the faculty but also the practicum supervisor is essential [24]. Evidence suggests that clinical nurses also want to further develop their knowledge of anatomy and physiology [9, 25]. Nurses who are confident in their knowledge of anatomy and physiology have a positive influence on the clinical practice of students [32]. We believe that providing clinical nurses with opportunities to study anatomy and physiology in the future will facilitate the continuous improvement of student nurses’ practical skills. Future studies need to verify the effectiveness of clinical practice initiatives and new education systems on campus to facilitate the integration of anatomy and physiology knowledge into nursing practice. Research physicians who specialize in basic science or clinically oriented basic science play an important role in bridging the gap between basic specialty and clinical disciplines [34]. Perhaps inviting more such educators to participate in nursing student education could help integrate anatomy and physiology into nursing practice.

Integration of anatomy and physiology and nursing practice

Apart from acquiring systemic knowledge, it is necessary to visualize how this knowledge is connected to nursing practice and evaluate students’ academic achievement.

Studies have suggested that knowledge of anatomy and physiology is associated with patient safety [31], decision making, and building trust [32]. However, given the limited research reports on these perspectives, there is a need to understand the overall picture in the future and visualize how knowledge of anatomy and physiology is specifically linked to nursing practice. To link knowledge of anatomy and physiology to nursing practice, it is important to clarify the goals within each subject while considering the curriculum of each university, so that students themselves are aware of what they should learn. The use of clinical material created for medical students’ anatomy and physiology courses increases the relevance of the course to students and improves students’ knowledge retention [34].

In the future, research will need to facilitate thinking that enhances the effectiveness of learning and integrates it with nursing practice, examine educational content and methods, and evaluate their effectiveness. Therefore, appropriate evaluation of the achievement objectives for anatomy and physiology is necessary to clarify how learning anatomy and physiology facilitates nursing practice and determine how to promote sufficient learning among students.

Limitations

For this scoping review, database searches were limited to studies pertaining to education in anatomy, physiology, and biological sciences, and keywords such as “pathophysiology” and “microbiology” were not used. National nursing school designations vary, and curricula are uniquely developed by each training school. Because the design of anatomy and physiology courses (i.e., textbooks, time, teaching methods, and examination methods) varied among schools, a critical evaluation was not conducted. Because this aimed to identify perceptions regarding the integration of anatomy and physiology learning into nursing practice, the quality of each literature review was not evaluated. The student and nurse perceptions in this study may have been influenced by differences in the course design.

Conclusions

Regarding perceptions on integrating anatomy and physiology into nursing practice, students reported that anatomy and physiology knowledge was important for patient safety and understanding the patient’s condition, whereas nurses reported that such knowledge was related to explaining the rationale of nursing practice, building trust, and effective practice teaching. In the future, research needs to clarify the attainment goals related to the integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice for students enrolled in a bachelor’s program. It is also necessary to establish an anatomy and physiology education system that connects anatomy and physiology with nursing practice and to examine the effectiveness of such an education system.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

References

  1. Birks M, Ralph N, Cant R, Chun Tie Y, Hillman E. Science knowledge needed for nursing practice: a cross-sectional survey of australian registered nurses. Collegian. 2018;25(2):209–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Torrance C, Jordan S. Bionursing: putting science into practice. Nurs Stand. 1995;9(49):25–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Van Wissen K, McBride-Henry K. Building confidence: an exploration of nurses undertaking a postgraduate biological science course. Contemp Nurse. 2010;35(1):26–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jensen KT, Knutstad U, Fawcett TN. The challenge of the biosciences in nurse education: a literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(9–10):1793–802.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jordan S, Davies S, Green B. The biosciences in the pre-registration nursing curriculum: staff and students’ perceptions of difficulties and relevance. Nurse Educ Today. 1999;19(3):215–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Grønlien HK, Christoffersen TE, Ringstad Ø, Andreassen M, Lugo RG. A blended learning teaching strategy strengthens the nursing students’ performance and self-reported learning outcome achievement in an anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry course–A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educ Pract 2021, 52:N.PAG-N.PAG.

  7. Shang F, Liu CY. Blended learning in medical physiology improves nursing students’ study efficiency. Adv Physiol Educ. 2018;42(4):711–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Joseph MA, Roach EJ, Natarajan J, Karkada S, Cayaban ARR. Flipped classroom improves omani nursing students performance and satisfaction in anatomy and physiology. BMC Nurs. 2021;20(1):1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Gordon CJ, Hudson PB, Plenderleith MB, Fisher M, Craft JA. Final year australian nursing students’ experiences with bioscience: a cross-sectional survey. Nurs Health Sci. 2017;19(1):22–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D, Peters MDJ, Horsley T, Weeks L, et al. PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):141–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lucas PJ, Baird J, Arai L, Law C, Roberts HM. Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Craft J, Hudson P, Plenderleith M, Wirihana L, Gordon C. Commencing nursing students’ perceptions and anxiety of bioscience. Nurse Educ Today. 2013;33(11):1399–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Evensen AE, Brataas HV, Cui G. Bioscience learning in nursing: a cross-sectional survey of beginning nursing students in Norway. BMC Nurs. 2020;19:2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Barton MJ, Bentley S, Craft J, Dupen O, Gordon C, Cayanan EA, Kunst E, Connors A, Todorovic M, Johnston ANB. Nursing students’ perceptions of clinical relevance and engagement with bioscience education: a cross-sectional study of undergraduate and postgraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 2021, 99:N.PAG-N.PAG.

  19. Montayre J, Dimalapang E, Sparks T, Neville S. New Zealand nursing students’ perceptions of biosciences: a cross-sectional survey of relevance to practice, teaching delivery, self-competence and challenges. Nurse Educ Today. 2019;79:48–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Davis GM. What is provided and what the registered nurse needs—bioscience learning through the pre-registration curriculum. Nurse Educ Today. 2010;30(8):707–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Behrendt M, Foster J, Machtmes K. Student Perception of how to succeed in a pre-nursing anatomy and physiology course. HAPS Educ. 2020;24(2):5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McKee G. Why is biological science difficult for first-year nursing students? Nurse Educ Today. 2002;22(3):251–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Christensen M, Craft JA, Wirihana L, Gordon CJ. Pathophysiology team teaching: Bioscientist contribution to knowledge integration in a nursing subject. J Clin Nurs (John Wiley Sons Inc). 2015;24(23–24):3739–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Molesworth M, Lewitt M. Preregistration nursing students’ perspectives on the learning, teaching and application of bioscience knowledge within practice. J Clin Nurs. 2016;25(5–6):725–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Craft JA, Hudson PB, Plenderleith MB, Gordon CJ. Registered nurses’ reflections on bioscience courses during the undergraduate nursing programme: an exploratory study. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26(11–12):1669–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Andrew S, McVicar A, Zanganeh M, Henderson N. Self-efficacy and relevance of bioscience for nursing, midwifery and healthcare students. J Clin Nurs. 2015;24(19–20):2965–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Friedel JM, Treagust DF. Learning bioscience in nursing education: perceptions of the intended and the prescribed curriculum. Learn Health Social Care. 2005;4(4):203–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mortimer-Jones SM, Wall PG, Russell S. Quantitative analysis of anxiety levels of nursing students studying bioscience in Australia. Nurs Health Sci. 2018;20(4):452–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McVicar A, Clancy J, Mayes N. An exploratory study of the application of biosciences in practice, and implications for pre-qualifying education. Nurse Educ Today. 2010;30(7):615–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Choi-Kwon S, Song KJ, An GJ, Choe M. How korean RNs evaluate their undergraduate education in the biosciences. J Nurs Educ. 2002;41(7):317–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fell PL, Dobbins K, Dee P. Bioscience learning in clinical placement: the experiences of pre-registration nursing students. J Clin Nurs. 2016;25(17–18):2694–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Montayre J, Ramjan LM, Maneze D, Ho MH, Maceri A, Salamonson Y. Connecting the dots”- the transfer of bioscience knowledge by new graduate nurses to the clinical setting: a qualitative study. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;97:104729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Logan PA, Angel L. Nursing as a scientific undertaking and the intersection with science in undergraduate studies: implications for nursing management. J Nurs Manag. 2011;19(3):407–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Spencer AL, Brosenitsch T, Levine AS, Kanter SL. Back to the basic sciences: an innovative approach to teaching senior medical students how best to integrate basic science and clinical medicine. Acad Med. 2008;83(7):662–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mukai KYT, Oshima C, Ishida Y, Matusda Y, Takeno Y, Arakawa M. Investigating the characteristics of anatomy and physiology studies in basic nursing education. Struct Function. 2017;16(1):8–18.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bradley E, Blackshaw C, Nolan P. Nurse lecturers’ observations on aspects of nurse prescribing training. Nurse Educ Today. 2006;26(7):538–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank all researchers whose articles were used in this review study.

Funding

This research and development project was funded by the Tokiwa University Research Incentive Grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health and Nutrition, Tokiwa University, Mito, 310-8585, Ibaraki, Japan

    Miwa Horiuchi-Hirose

  2. Former Department of Nursing, Ibaraki Christian University, Hitachi, 319-1295, Ibaraki, Japan

    Tomoko Fukuoka

  3. Graduate School of Medicine, Ehime University, Shitsukawa, Toon, 791-0295, Ehime, Japan

    Yuka Saeki

Authors
  1. Miwa Horiuchi-Hirose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tomoko Fukuoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuka Saeki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MHH; concept design; data collection, analysis and interpretation, drafting of manuscript. TF: participated in the data collection; YS; participated in the study design, data collection and analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miwa Horiuchi-Hirose.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Horiuchi-Hirose, M., Fukuoka, T. & Saeki, Y. Integration of anatomy and physiology into nursing practice as perceived by undergraduate students and registered nurses: a scoping review. BMC Nurs 22, 270 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01436-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01436-0

Keywords

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

Contact us