Competence and Training Needs in Infectious Disease Emergency Response Among Chinese Nurses: Cross-Sectional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: In recent years, the frequent outbreaks of infectious diseases and insufficient emergency response capabilities, particularly issues exposed during the COVID-19 pandemic, have underscored the critical role of nurses in addressing public health crises. It is currently necessary to investigate the emergency preparedness of nursing personnel following the COVID-19 pandemic completely liberalized, aiming to identify weaknesses and optimize response strategies. Objective: This study aimed to assess the emergency response competence of nurses, identify their specific training needs, and explore the various elements that impact their emergency response competence. Methods: Using a multistage stratified sampling method, 5 provinces from different geographical locations nationwide were initially randomly selected using random number tables. Subsequently, within each province, 2 tertiary hospitals, 4 secondary hospitals, and 10 primary hospitals were randomly selected for the survey. The random selection and stratification of the hospitals took into account various aspects such as geographical locations, different levels, scale, and number of nurses. This study involved 80 hospitals (including 10 tertiary hospitals, 20 secondary hospitals, and 50 primary hospitals), where nurses from different departments, specialties, and age groups anonymously completed a questionnaire on infectious disease emergency response capabilities. Results: This study involved 2055 participants representing various health care institutions. The nurses' mean score in infectious disease emergency response competence was 141.75 (SD 20.09), indicating a moderate to above-average level. Nearly one-fifth (n=397, 19.32%) of nurses have experience in responding to infectious disease emergencies; however, they acknowledge a lack of insufficient drills (n=615,29.93%) and training (n=502,24.43%). Notably, 1874 (91.19%) nurses expressed a willingness to undergo further training. Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that significant factors affecting infectious disease emergency response competence included the highest degree, frequency of drills and training, and the willingness to undertake further training (B=-11.455, 7.344, 11.639, 14.432, 10.255, 7.364, and -11.216; all P<.05). Notably, a higher frequency of participation in drills and training sessions correlated with better outcomes (P<.001 or P<.05). Nurses holding a master degree or higher demonstrated significantly lower competence scores in responding to infectious diseases compared with nurses with a diploma or associate degree (P=.001). Approximately 1644 (80%) of the nurses preferred training lasting from 3 days to 1 week, with scenario simulations and emergency drills considered the most popular training methods. Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential and need for nurses with infectious disease emergency response competence. Frequent drills and training will significantly enhance response competence; however, a lack of practical experience in higher education may have a negative impact on emergency performance. The study emphasizes the critical need for personalized training to boost nurses' abilities, especially through short-term, intensive methods and simulation drills. Further training and tailored plans are essential to improve nurses' overall proficiency and ensure effective responses to infectious disease emergencies.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».