Curtis Kate, Donoghue Judith
St George Hospital, Gray St, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
J Trauma Nurs. 2008 Apr-Jun;15(2):34-42. doi: 10.1097/01.JTN.0000327324.37534.02.
An initial profile of the demographics and current practice of Australian trauma nurse coordinators (TNCs) was conducted in 2003. The study identified common and differing role components, provided information to assist with establishing national parameters for the role, and identified the resources perceived necessary to enable the role to be performed effectively. This article compares the findings of the 2003 study with a 2007 survey, expanded to include New Zealand trauma coordinators. Forty-nine people, identified as working in a TNC capacity in Australia and New Zealand, were invited to participate in February 2007. The survey consisted of a 3-part questionnaire of respondents' demographics, the percentage of time allocated to 10 defined role functions (components), and the TNCs' perceived required resources to fulfill their role effectively. Feedback from the 2003 survey was incorporated in the redesign. Participation in the research enabled an update of the previously compiled Australia/New Zealand trauma network list. Thirty-six surveys (71.5% response rate) were returned. Descriptive statistics were undertaken for each item, and comparisons were made among states, territories, and countries. The mean age of respondents was 41+/-7.7, range 27 to 57, and 92% were female. They averaged 11.1 years of postregistration critical care or trauma experience, and 50% (n=18) reported working unpaid overtime (decreased from 56% (n=19) since 2003). Participants reported that most of their time was spent fulfilling the trauma registry component of the role (27% of total hours), followed by quality and clinical activities (19% of total hours), education, and administration. The component associated with the least amount of time was outreach (3% of total hours). Although the proportion of time has almost halved since 2003, TNCs still spend the most time maintaining trauma registries. Compared to the 2003 survey, Australian and New Zealand TNCs are working more unpaid overtime, spending more time performing quality and clinical activities and less time doing data entry. Despite where one works, the role components identified are fulfilled to a certain extent. However, trauma centers need to provide the TNC with adequate resources if trauma care systems are to be optimally effective.
2003年对澳大利亚创伤护士协调员（TNCs）的人口统计学特征和当前工作实践进行了初步概况分析。该研究确定了共同和不同的角色组成部分，提供了有助于确立该角色全国性参数的信息，并确定了有效履行该角色所需的资源。本文将2003年研究的结果与2007年的一项调查结果进行比较，后者范围扩大至包括新西兰的创伤协调员。2007年2月，邀请了49名被确定在澳大利亚和新西兰以TNC身份工作的人员参与。该调查包括一份由三部分组成的问卷，内容涉及受访者的人口统计学特征、分配给10项明确角色职能（组成部分）的时间百分比，以及TNCs认为有效履行其角色所需的资源。2003年调查的反馈意见被纳入重新设计中。参与研究使之前编制的澳大利亚/新西兰创伤网络名单得以更新。共收回36份调查问卷（回复率为71.5%）。对每个项目进行了描述性统计，并在州、领地和国家之间进行了比较。受访者的平均年龄为41±7.7岁，年龄范围在27至57岁之间，92%为女性。他们从事注册后重症护理或创伤护理工作的平均时长为11.1年，50%（n = 18）的人报告有 unpaid overtime（自2003年以来从56%（n = 19）有所下降）。参与者报告称，他们大部分时间用于履行该角色中的创伤登记部分（占总时长的27%），其次是质量和临床活动（占总时长的19%）、教育和行政管理。与最少时间相关的组成部分是外展工作（占总时长的3%）。尽管自2003年以来这一比例几乎减半，但TNCs仍将大部分时间用于维护创伤登记。与2003年的调查相比，澳大利亚和新西兰的TNCs从事 unpaid overtime的情况更多，用于质量和临床活动的时间更多，而用于数据录入的时间更少。无论在何处工作，所确定的角色组成部分在一定程度上都能得到履行。然而，如果创伤护理系统要达到最佳效果，创伤中心需要为TNC提供充足的资源。 （注：文中“unpaid overtime”直译为“无薪加班”，结合语境推测可能是指“自愿加班且无额外报酬”之类的情况，但具体含义需结合更多背景信息确定）
