Nursing Revalidation

This article details the Nursing and Midwifery Council revalidation requirements essential for all registered nurses and midwives in the United Kingdom. Nursing revalidation is effective from April 2016 and is built on the pre-existing Post-registration education and practice. Unlike the previous process, revalidation provides a more robust system which is clearly linked to the Code and should assist towards the delivery of quality and safe effective care

Abstract: Psychometric properties of two self-report clinical competence scales for nursing students.

Abstract: Psychometric properties of two self-report clinical competence scales for nursing students.
Background: It is important to assess the clinical competence of nursing students to gauge their professional development and educational needs. This can be measured by self-assessment tools. Anema and McCoy (2010) contended that the currently available measures need further psychometric testing.
Aim: To test the psychometric properties of Nursing Competencies Questionnaire (NCQ) and Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance (SECP) clinical competence scales.

Method: A non-randomly selected sample of n=248 2nd year nursing students completed NCQ, SECP and demographic questionnaires (June and September 2013). Mokken Scaling Analysis (MSA) was used to test the structural validity and scale properties, convergent and discriminant validity and reliability were subsequently tested.

Results: The NCQ provided evidence of a unidimensional scale which had strong scale scalability coefficients Hs =0.581; but limited evidence of item rankability HT =0.367. MSA undertaken with the SECP scale identified two potential unidimensional scales the SECP28 and SECP7, each with adequate evidence of good/reasonable scalablity psychometric properties as a summed scale but no/very limited evidence of scale rankability (SECP28: Hs = 0.55, HT=0.211; SECP7: Hs = 0.61, HT=0.049). Analysis of between cohort differences and NCQ/ SECP scale scores produced evidence of convergent and discriminant validity and good internal reliability: NCQ α = 0.93, SECP28 α = 0.96, and SECP7 α=0.89.

Discussion: The NCQ was verified to have evidence of reliability and validity; however, as the SECP findings are new, and the sample small, with reference to Straat and colleagues (2014), the SECP results should be interpreted with caution and verified on a second sample.

Conclusions: Measurement of perceived self-competence could inform the development of nursing competence and could start early in a nursing programme. Further testing of the NCQ and SECP scales with larger samples and from different years is indicated.


References:
Anema, M., G and McCoy, JK. (2010) Competency-Based Nursing Education: Guide to Achieving Outstanding Learner Outcomes. New York: Springer.
Straat, JH., van der Ark, LA and Sijtsma, K. (2014) Minimum Sample Size Requirements for Mokken Scale Analysis Educational and Psychological Measurement 74 (5), 809-822.

Exploring resilience in nursing and midwifery students: a literature review

AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the concepts of 'resilience' and 'hardiness' in nursing and midwifery students in educational settings and to identify educational interventions to promote resilience.

BACKGROUND: Resilience in healthcare professionals has gained increasing attention globally, yet to date resilience and resilience education in nursing and midwifery students remain largely under-researched.

DESIGN: An integrative literature review was planned, however, only quantitative evidence was identified therefore, a review of quantitative studies was undertaken using a systematic approach.

DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was undertaken using Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Maternity and Infant Care databases January 1980-February 2015.

REVIEW METHODS: Data were extracted using a specifically designed form and quality assessed using an appropriate checklist. A narrative summary of findings and statistical outcomes was undertaken.

RESULTS: Eight quantitative studies were included. Research relating to resilience and resilience education in nursing and midwifery students is sparse. There is a weak evidence that resilience and hardiness is associated with slightly improved academic performance and decreased burnout. However, studies were heterogeneous in design and limited by poor methodological quality. No study specifically considered student midwives.

CONCLUSION: A greater understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of resilience in nursing and midwifery students is essential for the development of educational resources. It is imperative that future research considers both nursing and midwifery training cohorts and should be of strong methodological quality.

Evaluation of 'Dementia Friends' programme for undergraduate nursing students: Innovative practice.

The ‘dementia friends’ programme was launched by the Alzheimer’s Society in the UK two years ago with the purpose of educating members of the public about the things they can do which can enhance the lives of people living with dementia. The aim of this project was to deliver a two-hour ‘Dementia Friendly Community Workshop’ written by the Alzheimer’s Society, to an entire cohort of first-year undergraduate nursing students in one Higher Education Institutions in Northern Ireland. Following delivery of the programme, students were asked to complete a short questionnaire on their knowledge and confidence in relation to dementia care before and after the Dementia Friendly Community programme. A total of 322 undergraduate first-year nursing students took part in the Dementia Friendly Community programme. Of these, 304 returned questionnaires; 31.25% of students stated their perceived improvement in dementia knowledge was ‘good’ while 49.01% stated their perceived improvement in dementia knowledge was ‘very good’ and 13.49% stated their perceived improvement in dementia knowledge was ‘excellent’. In relation to confidence in engaging with people with dementia, 31.91% stated ‘good’ improvement, 40.79% stated ‘very good’ improvement and 11.84% stated ‘excellent’ improvement. The Dementia Friendly Community programme was positively reviewed by the undergraduate students as it enhanced knowledge and confidence in relation to care of someone living with dementia.

Assessing the evidence: Student response system versus computer based testing for undertaking multiple choice question assessment in undergraduate nursing education

There is a dearth of evidence focusing on student preferences for computer-based testing versus
testing via student response systems for summative assessment in undergraduate education.
This quantitative study compared the preference and acceptability of computer-based testing
and a student response system for completing multiple choice questions in undergraduate
nursing education. After using both computer-based testing and a student response system to
complete multiple choice questions, 192 first year undergraduate nursing students rated their
preferences and attitudes towards using computer-based testing and a student response system.
Results indicated that seventy four percent felt the student response system was easy to use.
Fifty six percent felt the student response system took more time than the computer-based testing
to become familiar with. Sixty Percent felt computer-based testing was more users friendly.
Seventy Percent of students would prefer to take a multiple choice question summative exam
via computer-based testing, although Fifty percent would be happy to take using student response
system. Results are useful for undergraduate educators in relation to student’s preference
for using computer-based testing or student response system to undertake a summative
multiple choice question exam