What does it take to transfer what you learn in the classroom to your daily nursing practice?

Systematic and detailed evaluation of health care education and training is a complex and methodologically challenging area. The approach proposed by Kirkpatrick (1968) has been partially utilised but with few evaluations covering all four elements of his evaluation scheme: 1. Reaction; 2. Knowledge change; 3. Behaviour change and 4. Organizational results.This approach has proved important for nurse education, in that elements of it are adopted by many education providers focusing on the nurse learners reaction (level 1) to training (questions in this part of the scheme would include whether the learner is satisfied with the quality of the training). There is also an attempt to measure and monitor nursing knowledge development (level 2) and skill development (level 3) within nursing programmes. Consequently, formal evaluation of training is restricted to large undergraduate nursing programmes. However, the post graduate training of nurses also requires similar evaluation attention, but this has not so far been the case. In addition, there are significant critics of the Kirkpatrick approach who propose that these four domains are too simplistic and do not account for a number of important variables such as learner motivation (Klein et al 2006) and the quality of the training programme itself (Holton 1996). Indeed Holton et al (2000; Holton & Baldwin 2003) have proposed a model and tool for evaluation of training which accounts for 16 distinct transfer constructs. Health workers and educators may wish to evaluate training, but lack the resources and time to conduct systematic evaluations as proposed by the researchers above. At the same time, it can be argued that we must move beyond evaluation of learner satisfaction and whether they have learned more and tap into some more fundamental aspects of a nurse’s response to education and training. This paper will examine the role of Identity Theory and discuss whether a simple, user friendly scale can be developed which will encourage a wider application of evaluation to cover a greater number of nursing programmes. A education programme has been conducted throughout Wales and this paper will present the results of the pilot evaluation scheme developed to provide evidence of the impact of this education programme on the learners.</p

Competences, capabilities and values in nursing practice

This presentation will examine teh relationship between competence and capability in nursing practice. The distinction will be explored through an introduction of Values Based Practice (VBP) (Fulford et al 2012). This is a theory which links values and practice closely together in a reflexive approach to multi-disciplinary and person centred care. The presentation will introduce the work of UDINE-C [www.udinenetwork.eu] (a pan European nursing research and development group) who are working on research programes in this area.</p

Promoting the implementation of research into clinical practice: reporting on a new initiative to develop and support the clinical academic

Legacy description not available</p

An evaluation of a clinical competency toolkit for nurses and midwives

The National Council of Nurses and Midwives in Ireland Commissioned the School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, through an open tender process to develop and test a toolkit to assist service managers, nurse and midwife managers and nurses and midwives in clinical competency determination and competency development planning.This paper provides an overview of the development process of the toolkit and its links to existing competency frameworks for nurses’ and midwives’ and documents published by theNational Council. The presentation will provide details on the evaluation process used to valuidate the toolkit in Ireland through teh use of a mixed-method approach in sixteen pilot sites. A purposive sampleof 455 registered nurses or midwives were recruited to participate in the survey aspect of the pilot. In total 208 questionnaires were returned representing 46% of the total number distributed. The questionnaires sought experiences of using competencies, and opinions on the structure, content, relevance and utility of the toolkit, plus feedback on using the tools provided within the toolkit. Participants were also given the opportunity to provide opinions on how to improve the toolkit in an open response section, a demographic section was also included. In total, 45 people (73% response rate) also participated in six focus group interviews. A semi-structured interview schedule developed by the team was used to guide the discussion. The schedule addressed the areas of relevance, credibility, readability, helpfulness, and user friendliness.</p

Iatrogenic uncertainty: the hidden challenge in psychosocial supportive care

Background: Health policy directives have increasingly stressed the inclusion of patient voices and lived experiences, and co-produced knowledge, as vital to mainstream health care. An outcome of this direction is the gradually amassed ‘knowledge’ of the experiences of people affected by cancer (PABC). Despite such intention, nonetheless, there is little evidence of knowledge translation with regard to implementation of psychosocial supportive care services.Methods: In this paper we draw together a body of research from the University of Lincoln, UK, and La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia, and reanalyse our collective findings using a modified form of Foucauldian discourse analysis. Our research triangulates a range of qualitative methods and designs, with participants recruited from rural and regional communities.Results: An unexpected but important finding was the perceived emotional disconnection of the treating health and social care practitioners toward their patients. We posit that this is a result of unacknowledged professional emotional toil. A significant theoretical outcome, we suggest, is the concept of iatrogenic uncertainty and concomitant mortality salience. Combined, these profound existential responses present significant barriers in the patient-professional relationship. In particular, there is an increased risk of poor mental health outcomes for both PABC and their treating practitioners.Conclusion: Further research is recommended to explore how health and social care professionals use and resist patient experience, as well as their own existential dilemmas. We offer the concept of iatrogenic uncertainty as a way of reconceptualising such challenges in psychosocial supportive care.</p