MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105020066 · doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2020.08.002

Education, Competence, and Role of the Nurse Working in the PACU: An International Survey

2021· article· en· W3105020066 on OpenAlex
Karuna Dahlberg, Joni M. Brady, Maria Jaensson, Ulrica Nilsson, Jan Odom‐Forren

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingCompetence (human resources)SpecialtyMedicineProfessional associationNurse anesthetistFamily medicinePolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this research project was to describe the education, competence, and role of nurses working in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) in 11 countries having an established perianesthesia specialty nursing organization and membership on the International Collaboration of PeriAnaesthesia Nurses, Inc (ICPAN) Global Advisory Council (GAC). DESIGN: This is a descriptive international cross-sectional study. METHODS: A Web-based survey was distributed to members of the ICPAN GAC to be completed by the GAC representative or another expert perianesthesia nurse member from the organization (n = 11). The GAC has one representative from the following 11 ICPAN organizational members: ACPAN, Australian College of PeriAnaesthesia Nurses (Australia); BRV, Beroepsvereniging Recovery Verpleegkundigen (Belgium/The Netherlands); NAPANc, National Association of PeriAnesthesia Nurses of Canada (Canada); FSAIO, The Danish Association of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Recovery Nurses (Denmark); FANA, Finnish Association of Nurse Anaesthetists (Finland); Hellenic Perianesthesia Nursing Organization (Greece); IARNA, Irish Anaesthetic and Recovery Nurses Association (Ireland); PNC of NZNO, Perioperative Nurses College of the New Zealand Nurses Organisation (New Zealand); ANIVA, Swedish Association of Nurse Anesthetists and Intensive Care Nurses (Sweden); BARNA, British Anaesthetic and Recovery Nurses Association (United Kingdom); and ASPAN, American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses (USA). FINDINGS: Perianesthesia nursing was recognized as a professional nursing specialty in 6 of 11 countries, and 8 of 11 have established national guidelines or practice standards for perianesthesia nurses. The Netherlands, Ireland, and Australia are the only countries that have a formal education program for perianesthesia nurses. There were variations in nurse-to-patient ratios between the 11 countries, ranging from 2:1 to 1:3 in the Phase I recovery of critically ill patients; in Phase II recovery (day surgery) it was most common to have up to three to four patients per nurse. Perianesthesia nurses were mainly the only profession stationed in the PACU, with professions such as the anesthesiologist and surgeon on call. The nurses performed many job tasks autonomously; however, this differed between countries. CONCLUSIONS: Perianesthesia nurse education, clinical guidelines, other professions working in the PACU, and job tasks differ between countries. This knowledge can be used in international collaboration to further develop education and training for nurses working in the PACU. Continued international perianesthesia nursing partnership can only bring us closer and strengthen our specialty practice with the focus not on our differences but on our common denominators.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it