Department of Emergency Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN.
Institutional Research, California Institute of the Arts, Valencia, CA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Nov;26(11):1266-1272. doi: 10.1111/acem.13843. Epub 2019 Sep 23.
Nursing evaluations are an important component of residents' professional development as nurses are present for interactions with patients and nonphysician providers. Despite this, there has been few prior studies on the benefits, harms, or effectiveness of using nursing evaluations to help guide emergency medicine residents' development. We hypothesized that gender bias exists in nursing evaluations and that female residents, compared to their male counterparts, would receive more negative feedback on the perception of their interpersonal communication skills.
Data were drawn from nursing evaluations of residents between March 2013 and April 2016. All comments were coded if they contained words falling into four main categories: standout, ability, grindstone, and interpersonal. This methodology and the list of words that guided coding were based on the work of prior scholars. Names and gendered pronouns were obscured and each comment was manually reviewed and coded for valence (positive, neutral, negative) and strength (certain or tentative) by at least two members of the research team. Following the qualitative coding, quantitative analysis was performed to test for differences. To evaluate whether any measurable differences in ability between male and female residents existed, we compiled and compared American Board of Emergency Medicine in-training examination scores and relevant milestone evaluations between female and male residents from the same period in which the residents were evaluated by nursing staff.
Of 1,112 nursing evaluations, 30% contained comments. Chi-square tests on the distribution of valence (positive, neutral, or negative) indicated statistically significant differences in ability and grindstone categories based on the gender of the resident. A total of 51% of ability comments about female residents were negative compared to 20% of those about male residents (χ = 11.83, p < 0.01). A total of 57% of grindstone comments about female residents were negative as opposed 24% of those about male residents (χ = 6.03, p < 0.01).
Our findings demonstrate that, despite the lack of difference in ability or competence as measured by in-service examination scores and milestone evaluations, nurses evaluate female residents lower in their abilities and work ethic compared to male residents.
护理评估是护士专业发展的重要组成部分,因为护士与患者和非医师提供者进行互动。尽管如此,之前很少有研究关注使用护理评估来帮助指导急诊医学住院医师发展的益处、危害或效果。我们假设护理评估中存在性别偏见,与男性相比,女性住院医师在人际沟通技能方面的感知上会收到更多的负面反馈。
数据来自 2013 年 3 月至 2016 年 4 月期间对住院医师的护理评估。如果评论中包含以下四个主要类别中的单词,则对其进行编码:杰出、能力、磨砺石和人际关系。这种方法和指导编码的单词列表是基于先前学者的工作。名字和性别代词被隐藏,每个评论都由研究团队的至少两名成员手动审查和编码,以确定其语气(积极、中性、消极)和强度(确定或不确定)。在进行定性编码后,进行定量分析以检验差异。为了评估男性和女性住院医师之间是否存在可衡量的能力差异,我们汇编并比较了来自同一时期的接受护理人员评估的女性和男性住院医师的美国急诊医学委员会住院医师培训考试成绩和相关里程碑评估。
在 1112 份护理评估中,有 30%包含评论。基于居民的性别,对语气(积极、中性或消极)的分布进行卡方检验,表明在能力和磨砺石类别中存在统计学显著差异。与男性相比,关于女性的能力评论中,有 51%是负面的,而关于男性的能力评论中,有 20%是负面的(χ²=11.83,p<0.01)。与男性相比,关于女性的磨砺石评论中,有 57%是负面的,而关于男性的磨砺石评论中,有 24%是负面的(χ²=6.03,p<0.01)。
我们的研究结果表明,尽管缺乏服务考试成绩和里程碑评估衡量的能力或能力差异,但与男性相比,护士对女性住院医师的能力和职业道德评价较低。