Suppr超能文献

爱尔兰临床专家对研究和审计活动的感知结果。

Perceived outcomes of research and audit activities of clinical specialists in Ireland.

作者信息

Begley Cecily, Elliott Naomi, Lalor Joan G, Higgins Agnes

机构信息

Author Affiliations: Chair of Nursing and Midwifery (Dr Begley), Associate Professor in General Nursing (Dr Elliott), Associate Professor in Midwifery (Dr Lalor), and Professor in Mental Health Nursing (Dr Higgins), School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

Clin Nurse Spec. 2015 Mar-Apr;29(2):100-11. doi: 10.1097/NUR.0000000000000104.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to ascertain whether clinical specialists in Ireland were fulfilling role expectations in terms of their involvement in audit, evidence-based practice, and research activities; to examine the perceived impact on practice of clinical specialists'/advanced practitioners' research and audit roles and activities; and to compare research and audit activity in sites with and without clinical specialists/advanced practitioners.

DESIGN

This was a sequential, mixed-methods case study.

SETTING

The study was performed in clinical specialists'/advanced practitioners' hospital and community practice settings, and matched sites with no specialist/advanced practitioner, in each healthcare region in Ireland.

SAMPLE

A purposive sample of 17 clinical nurse or midwife specialists and 6 advanced nurse practitioners was selected, and 23 "matched" sites in hospital/services that provided similar client care were chosen. Midwifery and all branches of nursing were included.

METHODS

Data were collected January 2008 to December 2010, using nonparticipant observation (184 hours) of specialist/advanced practitioners and matched clinicians in practice, interviews with directors of nursing/midwifery (n = 23) and clinicians (n = 41), and analysis of documents from each case-study site. Pairs of researchers checked each other's work, negative case analysis was used, and the whole team agreed with the final findings.

RESULTS

Clinical specialists/advanced practitioners demonstrated more evidence-based practice and greater use of audit than did other clinicians fulfilling comparable clinical roles in matched sites. Fifteen specialist/advanced practitioners (65%) compared with 7 clinicians in matched sites (30%) conducted research (P < .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical specialists in Ireland were fulfilling role expectations in terms of audit, evidence-based practice, and research. The impact of clinical specialists' activities in this area, as perceived by clinical colleagues and managers, is considerable and is documented as greater than the impact of nonspecialist colleagues in comparable sites.

IMPLICATIONS

Increased investment in specialist/advanced practitioner posts, with resources and support for research activity, will increase evidence-based care, strengthen quality, and lead to improved practice.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是确定爱尔兰的临床专家在参与审核、循证实践和研究活动方面是否符合角色期望;研究临床专家/高级从业者的研究及审核角色和活动对实践的感知影响;并比较有和没有临床专家/高级从业者的场所中的研究和审核活动。

设计

这是一项顺序性的混合方法案例研究。

设置

该研究在爱尔兰每个医疗保健区域的临床专家/高级从业者的医院和社区实践场所,以及与之匹配的没有专家/高级从业者的场所中进行。

样本

选取了17名临床护士或助产士专家和6名高级执业护士作为有目的的样本,并在提供类似客户护理的医院/服务机构中选择了23个“匹配”场所。包括助产和护理的所有分支。

方法

于2008年1月至2010年12月收集数据,采用对专家/高级从业者及匹配的临床医生在实践中的非参与观察(184小时)、对护理/助产主任(n = 23)和临床医生(n = 41)的访谈,以及对每个案例研究场所的文件进行分析。研究人员两两核对彼此的工作,采用负面案例分析,整个团队对最终结果达成一致。

结果

与在匹配场所中履行类似临床角色的其他临床医生相比,临床专家/高级从业者展示出更多的循证实践和更多地使用审核。15名专家/高级从业者(65%)进行了研究,而匹配场所中的7名临床医生(30%)进行了研究(P <.04)。

结论

爱尔兰的临床专家在审核、循证实践和研究方面符合角色期望。临床同事和管理人员认为临床专家在该领域活动的影响相当大,且记录显示其影响大于可比场所中非专家同事的影响。

启示

增加对专家/高级从业者岗位的投资,提供研究活动的资源和支持,将增加循证护理,加强质量,并改善实践。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验