ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine and update the skills map for the position of Nurse Administrator in hospitals and Primary Care. METHOD: An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study based on a Delphi technique was conducted in hospital and Primary Care settings. Two nominal groups with 15 nurses each were used to define the contents of the questionnaire 0 in the Delphi technique. All nurses registered in the professional associations of Alicante, Castellón and Valencia were invited to participate. The results of the Delphi study was submitted to factor analysis to identify the set of skills and, subsequently, compare them with the offer of post-graduate course in colleges and universities during the 2014-15 academic year. RESULTS: Forty-five competences were extracted during the Nominal groups. In total, 705 nurses replied to the first wave in the Delphi Technique, and 394 in the second (response rate of 56%). Factorial analysis grouped the skills chosen into 10 factors: managing people, conflict management, independent learning, ethics, emotional balance, commitment, self-discipline, continuous improvement, critical-thinking, and innovation. Four skills groups identified in this study (emotional balancing, commitment, self-discipline and courage) were not usually included in the post-graduate courses CONCLUSIONS: The nurse administrator skills should be related to relational and ethical behaviour. The training offer of the post-graduate courses must be reoriented.
Subject(s)
Delphi Technique , Nurse Administrators , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Objetivo: Explorar la asociación de las características del propio paciente y de la asistencia en la aparición de los Efectos Adversos (EA), en un hospital de atención a crónicos y larga estancia. Método: Estudios de prevalencia realizados durante la segunda semana del mes de Mayo durante los años 2005, 2006, 2007 y 2008. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes ingresados en el hospital el día del estudio. Cada cama se examinó sólo una vez. Revisión de las historias durante el ingreso con la guía de cribado y el MRF2 adaptado para el proyecto EPIDEA. Resultados: La prevalencia de pacientes con EA asociados a la asistencia fue de 6,6% (IC95%: 4,4-8,9%). Los EA más frecuentemente encontrados fueron los relacionados con los cuidados, seguidos de los relacionados con la medicación, y en tercer lugar los relacionados con la infección. Los factores de riesgo extrínsecos (excluyendo el catéter venoso periférico que portan un alto porcentaje de pacientes) y la estancia se asociaron a mayor riesgo de EA cuando controlábam por el resto de variables. Los factores de riesgo intrínsecos y las comorbilidades no explicaban la prevalencia en nuestra muestra. Conclusiones: La presencia de factores de riesgo extrínsecos en el enfermo favorece la aparición de EA. Esto nos hace pensar que el verdadero riesgo reside en el número de exposiciones a actos potencialmente iatrogénicos más que a la vulnerabilidad del paciente (AU)
Objective: To explore the association between patient characteristics and health care circumstances with the presence of Adverse Events (AE) in a long stay and chronic care hospital. Methods: Prevalence studies carried out during the second week of May in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. All the patients admitted in hospital were included. Review of the medical records during the stay through the screening guide and the EPIDEA project adapted MRF2. Results: The prevalence of patient with AE related to care was 6,6% (95%CI 4,4-8,9%). The most frequent AE found were those related to nurse care, followed by those related to medication, and in third place those related to infection. The extrinsic risk factors and the length of stay were associated with a higher risk of AE when adjusting with the rest of variables. The intrinsic risk factors and comorbidities didnt explain the prevalence in our sample. Conclusions: The presence of certain extrinsic risk factors facilitates the appearance of AE. This makes us think th the true risk resides more in the number of expositions to acts potentially dangerous than in the patient's vulnerability (AU)
