An educational intervention to bridge the gap between nurses and nurse assistants- a focus group study in Norway.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen, Renate Slang, Anna Pauline Pedersen, Helene Matri, Malin H Westerlund, Trine Hovland, Kristin Myhre
{"title":"An educational intervention to bridge the gap between nurses and nurse assistants- a focus group study in Norway.","authors":"Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen, Renate Slang, Anna Pauline Pedersen, Helene Matri, Malin H Westerlund, Trine Hovland, Kristin Myhre","doi":"10.1186/s12912-025-03909-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies have found that a mixed staffing model where nurses and nurse assistants work as a team can deliver better care quality than standard nurse staffing models. However, there are issues related to communication gaps, unclear job descriptions, hierarchical barriers, resource limitations, cultural and systemic factors that need to be solved. The aim of the current study was to explore nurses' and nurse assistants' experiences with an educational intervention to bridge the gap between nurses and nurse assistants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The educational intervention involved nurses and nurse assistants and comprised a lecture of 90 min, followed by 60 min of simulation in the respective subject 'respiratory issues' and 'sepsis'. A qualitative study design, with six focus group interviews (N = 23), was used. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis in-line with recommendations from Braun and Clarke.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through analysis, two themes were identified, namely (1) Simulation; a love-hate relationship and (2) Increased insight into each other's competence and understanding of each other's focus. Both nurses and nurse assistants were sceptic to simulation as an educational intervention. However, all appreciated the combination of theory and simulation. The level seemed appropriate for nurse assistants, while nurses perceived the level as mostly repetition. The education day increased insight into each other's competence and understanding of each other's focus across wards and specialties, and across nurses and nurse assistants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Educational interventions between nurses and nurse assistants may be appropriate to decrease communication and collaboration gaps across occupations. Combining theoretical lectures and simulations also seemed to support this.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":48580,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nursing","volume":"24 1","pages":"1261"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03909-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Studies have found that a mixed staffing model where nurses and nurse assistants work as a team can deliver better care quality than standard nurse staffing models. However, there are issues related to communication gaps, unclear job descriptions, hierarchical barriers, resource limitations, cultural and systemic factors that need to be solved. The aim of the current study was to explore nurses' and nurse assistants' experiences with an educational intervention to bridge the gap between nurses and nurse assistants.

Methods: The educational intervention involved nurses and nurse assistants and comprised a lecture of 90 min, followed by 60 min of simulation in the respective subject 'respiratory issues' and 'sepsis'. A qualitative study design, with six focus group interviews (N = 23), was used. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis in-line with recommendations from Braun and Clarke.

Results: Through analysis, two themes were identified, namely (1) Simulation; a love-hate relationship and (2) Increased insight into each other's competence and understanding of each other's focus. Both nurses and nurse assistants were sceptic to simulation as an educational intervention. However, all appreciated the combination of theory and simulation. The level seemed appropriate for nurse assistants, while nurses perceived the level as mostly repetition. The education day increased insight into each other's competence and understanding of each other's focus across wards and specialties, and across nurses and nurse assistants.

Conclusions: Educational interventions between nurses and nurse assistants may be appropriate to decrease communication and collaboration gaps across occupations. Combining theoretical lectures and simulations also seemed to support this.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

教育干预弥合护士和护士助理之间的差距-挪威焦点小组研究。
背景:研究发现,护士和护士助理作为一个团队工作的混合人员配置模式比标准护士配置模式能提供更好的护理质量。然而,也存在沟通差距、职位描述不清、层级障碍、资源限制、文化和体制因素等问题需要解决。本研究的目的是探讨护士和护士助理的经验与教育干预,以弥合护士和护士助理之间的差距。方法:教育干预涉及护士和护士助理,包括90分钟的讲座,随后分别进行60分钟的模拟“呼吸问题”和“败血症”。采用定性研究设计,包括6个焦点小组访谈(N = 23)。根据Braun和Clarke的建议,使用主题分析来分析数据。结果:通过分析,确定了两个主题,即(1)仿真;(2)加深对彼此能力的了解和对彼此关注重点的理解。护士和护士助理都对模拟作为教育干预持怀疑态度。然而,所有人都欣赏理论与模拟的结合。该水平似乎适合护士助理,而护士认为该水平主要是重复。教育日加深了我们对彼此能力的了解,也加深了我们对病房、专科、护士和护士助理工作重点的了解。结论:护士和护理助理之间的教育干预可能适合减少职业间的沟通和协作差距。结合理论讲座和模拟似乎也支持这一点。临床试验号:不适用。
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
BMC Nursing
BMC Nursing Nursing-General Nursing
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
317
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Nursing is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of nursing research, training, education and practice.
×
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