Professional nurses’ perceptions regarding clinical competence of community service nurses in North West province, South Africa
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: South African Nursing Council requires nurses who successfully complete their training to perform a year of community service before obtaining registration as professional nurses (Regulation 425). Community service for health professionals was introduced as a strategy to retain newly qualified professionals within the country. The premise is that community service for newly graduated nurses gives them the opportunity to develop skills and acquire knowledge critical in their professional development. AIM: To explore and describe the perceptions of professional nurses as the supervisors of community service nurses (CSNs) during their 12 months of community service. SETTING: Selected hospitals of the North West province, South Africa. METHODS: A qualitative, exploratory and descriptive design was used. The study was conducted between September and November 2018 at three public hospitals in the North West province. Through purposive sampling, 15 professional nurses who supervise CSNs participated in the study. Data were collected in three focus group discussions using semi-structured questions. All focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Data were analysed using Pienaar's four steps of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: perceptions of clinical competence, challenges impacting clinical competence and suggestions to improve clinical competence. CONCLUSION: It is suggested that even though the majority of CSNs were perceived to be competent and capable of working independently, they still required supervision and mentorship to refine their competency. Furthermore, the study reported similar challenges noted from previous studies that were perceived to be affecting CSNs' ability to deliver quality health care, and therefore recommendations for improvement were made. CONTRIBUTION: The study contributed to the developed the clinical competence evaluation tool which will be of benefit to the future community service nurses in the province.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».