Nursing supervision in the mobile pre-hospital emergency care service.

Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P Pub Date : 2025-07-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0238en
Camila Galiano, André Almeida de Moura, Josué Souza Gleriano, Vivian Aline Mininel, Mayra de Cássia Trovó, Mariana Fraga de Figueiredo, Bethania Ferreira Goulart, Lucieli Dias Pedreschi Chaves
{"title":"Nursing supervision in the mobile pre-hospital emergency care service.","authors":"Camila Galiano, André Almeida de Moura, Josué Souza Gleriano, Vivian Aline Mininel, Mayra de Cássia Trovó, Mariana Fraga de Figueiredo, Bethania Ferreira Goulart, Lucieli Dias Pedreschi Chaves","doi":"10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0238en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To analyze limitations and potentialities of nursing supervision, according to the nursing team, of a Mobile Emergency Care Service.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Descriptive research, with a qualitative approach, using the Critical Incident Technique. Nurses and nursing technicians participated. Data were collected in a semi-structured, individual, recorded interview, later transcribed, followed by the grouping and categorization of Critical Incidents, using Bardin's content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-seven critical incidents emerged from the interviews, 22% received positive and 78% negative references, indicating a predominance of factors that limit supervision. These factors were categorized into \"Singularities of nursing supervision\", \"Organizational conditions\", \"People management\", and \"Vacancy regulation\".</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Enhancing factors: institutional support, education as a supervision tool, team meetings, timely feedback and participatory management; limiting factors: indirect nursing supervision (nurse and technicians in different teams), lack of materials and maintenance and of institutional support, nurse work overload, conflicts, and lack of communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":94195,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P","volume":"59 ","pages":"e20240238"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12244992/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0238en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To analyze limitations and potentialities of nursing supervision, according to the nursing team, of a Mobile Emergency Care Service.

Method: Descriptive research, with a qualitative approach, using the Critical Incident Technique. Nurses and nursing technicians participated. Data were collected in a semi-structured, individual, recorded interview, later transcribed, followed by the grouping and categorization of Critical Incidents, using Bardin's content analysis.

Results: Seventy-seven critical incidents emerged from the interviews, 22% received positive and 78% negative references, indicating a predominance of factors that limit supervision. These factors were categorized into "Singularities of nursing supervision", "Organizational conditions", "People management", and "Vacancy regulation".

Conclusion: Enhancing factors: institutional support, education as a supervision tool, team meetings, timely feedback and participatory management; limiting factors: indirect nursing supervision (nurse and technicians in different teams), lack of materials and maintenance and of institutional support, nurse work overload, conflicts, and lack of communication.

院前流动急救服务的护理监督。
目的:分析某流动急救服务队护理监督的局限性和潜力。方法:采用关键事件技术,采用定性方法进行描述性研究。护士和护理技术人员参与。数据是在半结构化的、个人的、记录的访谈中收集的,随后进行转录,然后使用Bardin的内容分析对关键事件进行分组和分类。结果:访谈中出现了77起关键事件,22%的人得到了正面评价,78%的人得到了负面评价,表明限制监督的因素占主导地位。这些因素分为“护理监管的独特性”、“组织条件”、“人员管理”和“职位空缺调节”。结论:促进因素:制度支持、教育作为监督工具、团队会议、及时反馈和参与式管理;限制因素:间接护理监督(护士和技术人员在不同的团队),缺乏材料和维护和机构支持,护士工作超载,冲突和缺乏沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信