RESUMEN
AIM: To develop a parsimonious, shortened version of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised for perioperative nurses to complete as part of their specialty training while retaining good psychometric properties. DESIGN: A longitudinal online survey was adopted. METHODS: A national sample of perioperative nurses from Australia completed an online survey at two different time points 6 months apart between February and October 2021. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for item reduction and construct validity, while criterion, convergent validity and internal consistency were examined. RESULTS: Usable data for psychometric assessment were obtained from 485 operating room nurses at time 1 and 164 nurses at time 2. The original 40-item revised scale was reduced to an 18-item measure, maintaining its six domains. Cronbach's alpha for the 18-item scale was .92 at time 1 and .90 at time 2. Scale validation demonstrated moderate to weak positive relationships in perceived competence scores relative to general self-efficacy, years of operating room experience, postgraduate education and recency of training. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the 18-item Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised Short Form has initial robust psychometric properties and may be implemented in clinical settings as part of perioperative transition-to-practice, orientation programs and yearly professional development reviews. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: This short-form scale can help prepare perioperative nurses to demonstrate clinical competence in a climate of increasing professional demands using a valid measure of competence required in clinical practice. IMPACT: Short and validated scales of perioperative competence are needed in clinical practice. Assessment of practising operating room nurses' perceived competence is essential in quality care provision, workforce planning and human resource management. This study provides an 18-item measure of the previously validated 40-item Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised. This scale can help provide an option for future testing of perioperative nurses' competence in clinical or research settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Perioperative nurses were involved in the design of the study, particularly in the assessment of validation of the tools used in the study.
Asunto(s)
Competencia Clínica , Quirófanos , Humanos , Psicometría/métodos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Australia , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients are at risk of developing pressure injuries in the peri-operative setting. Studies evaluating the impact of educational interventions on peri-operative nurses' knowledge and reported practice are scarce. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a multifaceted intervention on peri-operative nurses' (a) knowledge of pressure injury risks, risk assessment and prevention strategies for patients in the operating suite; and (b) reported practice relating to risk assessment practices and implementation of prevention strategies for patients in the operating suite. METHODS: A before-after research design was used. A convenience sample of all registered and enrolled nurses employed in two hospitals' operating suites was recruited. A multifaceted intervention was delivered which comprised a short presentation, educational materials and reminder posters. A 48-item survey tool was completed pre-and post-intervention to measure self-reported knowledge and practice. RESULTS: 70 eligible peri-operative nurses completed both surveys. Post-intervention, statistically significant improvements were seen in knowledge of correct descriptions of pressure injury stages (p=0.001); appropriate reassessment for patients with a new pressure injury (p=0.05); appropriate actions for patients with an existing stage 1 (p=0.02) and stage 2 pressure injury (p=0.04). Statistical improvements were also seen in reported practice relating to an increase in the use of a risk assessment tool in conjunction with clinical judgement (p=0.0008); verbal handover of patients' pressure injury risk status from the operating room nurse to the recovery room (p=0.023) and from the recovery room nurse to the postoperative ward nurse (p=0.045). The number of participants reporting use of non-recommended and recommended pressure-relieving strategies was unchanged. CONCLUSION: A multi-faceted educational intervention can improve some aspects of perioperative nurses' knowledge and reported practice such as risk assessment practices but not others such as use of recommended pressure-relieving devices. Further research is required to ascertain effective interventions which improve all areas of practice and knowledge, particularly in the use of appropriate pressure-relieving devices in order to prevent pressure injuries in surgical patients.