Tommasini Cristina, Dobrowolska Beata, Zarzycka Danuta, Bacatum Claudia, Bruun Anne Marie Gran, Korsath Dag, Roel Siv, Jansen Mette Bro, Milling Tine, Deschamps Anne, Mantzoukas Stefanos, Mantzouka Christine, Palese Alvisa
Udine University, Italy.
Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Lublin, Poland.
Nurse Educ Today. 2017 Apr;51:41-47. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.01.002. Epub 2017 Jan 10.
Assessing clinical competence in nursing students abroad is a challenge, and requires both methods and instruments capable of capturing the multidimensional nature of the clinical competences acquired.
The aim of the study was to compare the clinical competence assessment processes and instruments adopted for nursing students during their clinical placement abroad.
A case study design was adopted in 2015.
A purposeful sample of eight nursing programmes located in seven countries (Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Poland, Portugal and Italy) were approached.
Tools as instruments for evaluating competences developed in clinical training by international nursing students, and written procedures aimed at guiding the evaluation process, were scrutinised through a content analysis method.
All clinical competence evaluation procedures and instruments used in the nursing programmes involved were provided in English. A final evaluation of the competences was expected by all nursing programmes at the end of the clinical placement, while only four provided an intermediate evaluation. Great variability emerged in the tools, with between five and 88 items included. Through content analysis, 196 items emerged, classified into 12 different core competence categories, the majority were categorised as 'Technical skills' (=60), 'Self-learning and critical thinking' (=27) and 'Nursing care process' (=25) competences. Little emphasis was given in the tools to competences involving 'Self-adaptation', 'Inter-professional skills', 'Clinical documentation', 'Managing nursing care', 'Patient communication', and 'Theory and practice integration'.
Institutions signing Bilateral Agreements should agree upon the competences expected from students during their clinical education abroad. The tools used in the process, as well as the role expected by the student, should also be agreed upon. Intercultural competences should be further addressed in the process of evaluation, in addition to adaptation to different settings. There is also a need to establish those competences achievable or not in the host country, aiming at increasing transparency in learning expectations and evaluation.
评估国外护理专业学生的临床能力是一项挑战,需要能够体现所获得临床能力多维度性质的方法和工具。
本研究旨在比较国外临床实习期间护理专业学生的临床能力评估过程和所采用的工具。
2015年采用了案例研究设计。
选取了位于七个国家(比利时、丹麦、希腊、挪威、波兰、葡萄牙和意大利)的八个护理项目作为有目的的样本。
通过内容分析法,对国际护理专业学生在临床培训中用于评估能力的工具以及旨在指导评估过程的书面程序进行了审查。
所涉及的护理项目中使用的所有临床能力评估程序和工具均为英文。所有护理项目都期望在临床实习结束时对能力进行最终评估,而只有四个项目提供中期评估。工具差异很大,包含的项目从5项到88项不等。通过内容分析,出现了196个项目,分为12个不同的核心能力类别,其中大多数被归类为“技术技能”(=60)、“自主学习和批判性思维”(=27)以及“护理过程”(=25)能力。工具中对涉及“自我适应”、“跨专业技能”、“临床记录”、“护理管理”、“患者沟通”以及“理论与实践整合”的能力关注较少。
签署双边协议的机构应就国外临床教育期间对学生的能力期望达成一致。还应就评估过程中使用的工具以及学生应发挥的作用达成一致。除了适应不同环境外,在评估过程中还应进一步关注跨文化能力。此外,有必要确定在东道国可实现或不可实现的能力,以提高学习期望和评估的透明度。