Revisiting task orientated care: Oral histories of former student nurses in Ireland (1960-2001).

The apprenticeship model of nurse training was in place in Ireland up to the end of the twentieth century. Task orientated care was a feature of this model. It is important to examine task allocation from the student's perspective, in light of current and on-going debates regarding student nurses' supernumerary status. Both approaches influence the status of the student; as a worker with task allocation and as a learner with supernumerary status. Oral history interviews were undertaken with twelve former student nurses (1960-2001) to explore their experiences of clinical learning and task allocation. Task allocation consisted of household tasks and tasks involving patient care. Students' experiences were influenced more by issues surrounding the task, particularly the 'task-person', than the task itself. Therefore, a learning environment that is inclusive, supportive and understanding of students' learning is recommended, regardless of the model of nurse training or education that might be in place. These findings can inform current debate on supernumerary status and task allocation for the student nurse within their clinical learning environment, but also on the history of nurse education in Ireland in the twentieth century.

Baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding.

BACKGROUND: Baby-led breastfeeding is recommended as best practice in determining the frequency and duration of a breastfeed. An alternative approach is described as scheduled, where breastfeeding is timed and restricted in frequency and duration. It is necessary to review the evidence that supports current recommendations, so that women are provided with high-quality evidence to inform their feeding decisions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding, for healthy newborns. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (23 February 2016), CINAHL (1981 to 23 February 2016), EThOS, Index to Theses and ProQuest database and World Health Organization's 1998 evidence to support the 'Ten Steps' to successful breastfeeding (10 May 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised and quasi-randomised trials with randomisation at both the individual and cluster level. Studies presented in abstract form would have been eligible for inclusion if sufficient data were available. Studies using a cross-over design would not have been eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all potential studies we identified as a result of the search strategy. We would have resolved any disagreement through discussion or, if required, consulted a third review author, but this was not necessary. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified that were eligible for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is no evidence from randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding, for healthy newborns. It is recommended that no changes are made to current practice guidelines without undertaking robust research, to include many patterns of breastfeeding and not limited to baby-led and scheduled breastfeeding. Future exploratory research is needed on baby-led breastfeeding that takes the mother's perspective into consideration.

Baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding.

BACKGROUND: Baby-led breastfeeding is recommended as best practice in determining the frequency and duration of a breastfeed. An alternative approach is described as scheduled, where breastfeeding is timed and restricted in frequency and duration. It is necessary to review the evidence that supports current recommendations, so that mothers are provided with high-quality evidence to inform their feeding decisions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding, for healthy newborns. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 November 2013), CINAHL (1981 to 13 November 2013), EThOS, Index to Theses and ProQuest database and World Health Organization's 1998 evidence to support the 'Ten Steps' to successful breastfeeding (6 November 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials with randomisation at both the individual and cluster level. Studies presented in abstract form were eligible for inclusion if sufficient data were available. Studies using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies we identified as a result of the search strategy. We would have resolved any disagreement through discussion or, if required, consulted a third review author, but this was not necessary. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified that were eligible for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is no evidence from randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding for successful breastfeeding, for healthy newborns, therefore no conclusions could be taken at this point. It is recommended that no changes are made to current practice guidelines without undertaking further robust research, to include many patterns of breastfeeding and not limited to baby-led and scheduled breastfeeding. Further research is needed to also evaluate the effects of baby-led compared with scheduled (or mixed) breastfeeding on successful breastfeeding, for healthy newborns. However, conducting such a study, particularly a randomised controlled trial is unlikely to receive ethical approval, as the issue of obtaining informed consent from new mothers or mothers-to-be for randomisation between baby-led and scheduled breastfeeding is a difficult one and it is likely that the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative practices would prohibit such a study.

Use of peer assessment as a student engagement strategy in nurse education.

This paper describes how peer assessment was implemented in an undergraduate nursing program in Ireland to enhance student engagement, and reports students' (n=37) experiences of the process. The process involved second year Bachelor of Nursing Science students developing marking criteria and marking two of their colleagues' assignments anonymously. A qualitative descriptive design using focus group interviews was used to collect data on students' experiences. Demographic data were collected through questionnaires. The analysis identified three themes: (i) impact on student engagement; (ii) challenges of peer assessment; and (iii) making it better. The findings revealed that most students enjoyed the process, and that peer assessment facilitates and enhances student engagement. The findings also provide evidence to support the self-regulation theory of learning. A detailed account of the methods used to implement peer assessment is also provided, which might be useful for other nurse educators seeking to implement peer assessment at an undergraduate level.