ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the recognition degree of resource based relative value scales (RBRVS) among the head nurses of different clinical departments and provide references for the hospitals to gradually adjust and improve the RBRVS performance allocation program. Method Toally 13 clinical head nurses were recruited and in-depth interviews were phenomenologically conducted. The acquired data were analyzed. Results Six themes were extracted: RBRVS's reflection of the value of nursing operation, avoidance of nonstandard registering and charging, differences in performance distribution across clinical departments, unreasonable allocation between internal medical and surgical departments, small numbers of chargeable nursing items, larger coefficient gap between doctors and nurses and inaccuracy in data collection. Conclusions RBRVS for performance evaluation is concerned about the work strength and technical difficulty, but less attention to quality problems is attached. In implementation, we should reasonably treat differences between the clinical departments, setting up reasonable gap coefficient and increasing their enthusiasm. Moreover, as the direct leaders of nursing teams, the nursing management should master the principles of RBRVS and improve the management ability of head nurses.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the recognition degree of resource based relative value scales (RBRVS) among the head nurses of different clinical departments and provide references for the hospitals to gradually adjust and improve the RBRVS performance allocation program. Method Toally 13 clinical head nurses were recruited and in-depth interviews were phenomenologically conducted. The acquired data were analyzed. Results Six themes were extracted: RBRVS's reflection of the value of nursing operation, avoidance of nonstandard registering and charging, differences in performance distribution across clinical departments, unreasonable allocation between internal medical and surgical departments, small numbers of chargeable nursing items, larger coefficient gap between doctors and nurses and inaccuracy in data collection. Conclusions RBRVS for performance evaluation is concerned about the work strength and technical difficulty, but less attention to quality problems is attached. In implementation, we should reasonably treat differences between the clinical departments, setting up reasonable gap coefficient and increasing their enthusiasm. Moreover, as the direct leaders of nursing teams, the nursing management should master the principles of RBRVS and improve the management ability of head nurses.