Search

Background: One comprehensive part of nursing practice is performing technical skills and handling of medical equipment. This might be challenging for new registered nurses (RNs) to do in patient-safe way., Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe and compare the extent to which new RNs perform various technical skills and handle medical devices in different settings, and to investigate their possibility for continued learning in this respect. A further aim was to describe their perceptions of incident reporting related to technical skills and medical devices., Design: A cross-sectional study with descriptive and comparative design., Participants: RNs who recently graduated from a nursing programme at three Swedish universities and had worked as a RN for up to 1 year were included in the study (n=113, response rate 57%)., Method: Data were collected by means of a postal questionnaire., Results: Half of the RNs reported that they performed several of the listed tasks every day or every week, regardless of workplace. These tasks were most frequently performed in surgical departments. The majority of the participants (76%) stated a need of continued practical training. However, less than half of them (48%) had access to a training environment. Several participants (43%) had been involved in incidents related to technical skills or medical devices, which were not always reported. Nearly a third of the participants (31%) did not use the existing guidelines when performing technical skills, and reflection on performance was uncommon., Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of shared responsibilities between nurse educators and health care employers to provide learning opportunities for new RNs in technical skills, to maintain patient safety. To increase the safety culture where nursing students and new RNs understand the importance of using evidence-based guidelines and taking a reflective approach in the performance of technical tasks is needed., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Despite an increasing focus on simulation as a learning strategy in nursing education, there is limited evidence on the transfer of simulated skills into clinical practice. Therefore it's important to increase knowledge of how clinical skills laboratories (CSL) can optimize students' learning for development of professional knowledge and skills, necessary for quality nursing practice and for patient safety. Thus, the aim was to describe nursing students' experiences of learning in the CSL as a preparation for their clinical practice. Interviews with 16 students were analysed with content analysis. An overall theme was identified - walking the bridge - in which the CSL formed a bridge between the university and clinical settings, allowing students to integrate theory and practice and develop a reflective stance. The theme was based on categories: conditions for learning, strategies for learning, tension between learning in the skills laboratory and clinical settings, and development of professional and personal competence. The CSL prepared the students for clinical practice, but a negative tension between learning in CSL and clinical settings was experienced. However, this tension may create reflection. This provides a new perspective that can be used as a pedagogical approach to create opportunities for students to develop their critical thinking., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Educating health care professionals for working in interprofessional teams is a key preparation for roles in modern healthcare. Interprofessional teams require members who are competent in their roles. Self-assessment instruments measuring interprofessional competence (IPC) are widely used in educational preparation, but their ability to accurately and reliably measure competence is unknown. We conducted a systematic review to identify variations in the characteristics and use of self-report instruments measuring IPC. Following a systematic search of electronic databases and after applying eligibility criteria, 38 articles were included that describe 8 IPC self-report instruments. A large variation was found in the extent of coverage of IPC core competencies as articulated by the Interprofessional Education Collaborative. Each instrument's strength of evidence, psychometric performance and uses varied. Rather than measuring competency as "behaviours", they measured indirect proxies for competence, such as attitudes towards core interprofessional competencies. Educators and researchers should identify the most appropriate and highest-performing IPC instruments according to the context in which they will be used. Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework (). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]