Search

Clinical reasoning is an essential component of nursing. It has emerged as a concept that integrates the core competencies of quality and safety education for nurses. In cooperation with five European partners, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal (IPS) realized the "Clinical Reasoning in Nursing and Midwifery Education and Practice" project as part of the Erasmus+ project. As a partner, our team designed a multiplier event-the student training course. The aim of this report is to describe the construction and development of this clinical reasoning training course for nursing students. We outline the pedagogical approach of an undergraduate training course on clinical reasoning in 2023, which we separated into four stages: (i) welcoming, (ii) knowledge exploration, (iii) pedagogical learning, and (iv) sharing experience. This paper presents the learning outcomes of the collaborative reflection on and integration of the clinical reasoning concept among nursing students. This educational experience fostered reflection and discussion within the teaching team of the nursing department regarding the concept, models, and teaching/learning methods for clinical reasoning, with the explicit inclusion of clinical reasoning content in the nursing curriculum. We highlight the importance of implementing long-term pedagogical strategies in nursing education.

Background: Patients recently diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have specific educational and supportive needs. These could partly be addressed with mentoring by other patients living with RA. This qualitative study explores stakeholder perceptions towards peer mentoring in early RA care., Methods: Two focus groups with patients with early RA (n=10), one with patient organisation representatives (n=5), one with rheumatologists (n=8) and one with rheumatology nurses (n=5) were held. Two patient research partners supported analysis and interpretation., Results: Four overarching themes were found: added value, experience with peer mentoring, concerns and need in daily care. Patients and patient organisation representatives confirmed the potential of peer mentoring especially regarding sensitive topics not easily discussed with professionals. Patients felt it could provide additional understanding and recognition. Nurses and rheumatologists were less convinced of the added value of peer mentoring because patients never mentioned it and they were concerned about the loss of control over correct information provision. The need for peer mentoring was perceived as person and disease phase-dependent and should therefore be optional, rather than a care standard. The requirements for a peer mentorship programme remained challenging to define for stakeholders. However, all expressed the need for supervision by healthcare professionals and that peer mentors should be carefully selected, educated and matched to newly diagnosed patients., Conclusion: Peer mentoring and its implementation remain vague concepts, especially for healthcare providers. However, patients are interested in mentoring by peers, and the current results may support in effectively implementing such programmes early in the disease., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)