کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
367340 621490 2010 6 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
A systematic review evaluating the impact of post-registration nursing and midwifery education on practice
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت پرستاری و مشاغل بهداشتی پرستاری
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
A systematic review evaluating the impact of post-registration nursing and midwifery education on practice
چکیده انگلیسی

SummaryGiven the current focus on evidence-based practice, it is surprising that there is a dearth of systematic evidence of the impact on practice of post-registration nursing and midwifery education. The systematic review presented here formed part of a national review of post-registration nursing and midwifery education in Ireland [Health Service Executive, 2008. Report of the Post-registration Nursing and Midwifery Education Review Group: Changing practice to support service delivery. Health Service Executive, Dublin]. The review focuses specifically on the impact on practice from the perspective of nurses, midwives, patients, carers, education and health service providers. Sixty-one (61) studies met the criteria set. These studies were mainly of a retrospective and descriptive nature, often with small cohorts, set within one educational setting. The findings indicate that students benefit from post-registration programmes in relation to changes in attitudes, perceptions, knowledge and in skill acquisition. There is also some evidence that students apply their newly acquired attitudes, knowledge and skills. There is however limited evidence of the direct impact on organisational and service delivery changes, and on benefits to patients and carers. It can be concluded that the impact of post-registration nursing and midwifery education on practice has yet to be fully explored through a more systematic and coherent programme evaluation approach.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Nurse Education in Practice - Volume 10, Issue 2, March 2010, Pages 64–69
نویسندگان
, , , ,