New graduate nurses' clinical competence: A mixed methods systematic review.

AIM: To appraise and synthesize evidence of empirical studies reporting assessment of new graduate nurses' clinical competence in clinical settings. DESIGN: Mixed methods systematic review. DATA SOURCES: The search strategy included keywords relevant to: new graduate nurse; clinical competence; and competence assessment. The searched literature databases included CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science. The search was limited to full-text papers in English or French, published between 2010 -September 2019. REVIEW METHODS: Inclusion criteria were: 1) empirical studies; 2) detailed method and complete results sections; 3) competence assessment in clinical settings; and 4) new graduate nurses (≤24 months). Two independent reviewers screened eligible papers, extracted data and used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool framework for quality appraisal. Divergences were solved through discussion. RESULTS: About 42 papers were included in this review: quantitative (N = 31), qualitative (N = 7) and mixed methods (N = 4). Findings suggest that new graduate nurses exhibit a good or adequate level of competence. Longitudinal studies show a significant increase in competence from 0-6 months, but findings are inconsistent from 6-12 months. CONCLUSION: There are a multitude of quantitative tools available to measure clinical competence. This suggests a need for a review of their rigor. IMPACT: No recent reviews comprehensively synthesized the findings from new graduate nurses' clinical competence. This review has found that new graduate nurses' competence has been mostly assessed as good, despite the expectation that they should be more competent. Longitudinal studies did not always show a significant increase in competence. These findings can help nurse educators in providing more support to new graduate nurses throughout the transition period or design improved transition programme. This review also identified quantitative tools and qualitative methods that can be used for competence assessment.

Measurement properties of scales assessing new graduate nurses' clinical competence: A systematic review of psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: New graduate nurses' competence is a concern for all healthcare organizations. Previous reports show heterogeneous levels of competency amongst them. As a positive association between competency and quality of care in clinical settings has been suggested, it is essential for researchers and clinicians to select valid, reliable, and responsive scales to assess new nurses' competence. However, a systematic evaluation of the measurement properties of scales measuring new nurses' competence had yet to be published. OBJECTIVE: To analyse, evaluate and synthesize the measurement properties of scales used to assess new nurses' clinical competence. DESIGN: A systematic psychometric review based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methods. DATA SOURCES: The search strategy included a combination of keywords and thesaurus terms related to new graduate nurses, clinical competence, and competence assessment. Five databases were searched: Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science. The search was limited to full-text papers published in English or French, from 2010 to 2019. REVIEW METHODS: Two independent reviewers screened eligible papers, extracted data related to validity, reliability, and responsiveness of each scale, and evaluated the quality of their measurement properties as well as risk of bias in their psychometric evaluation. Divergences were solved through discussion. RESULTS: Ten scales were included: eight original scales, one culturally adapted and one modified. Of these scales, eight were developed or adapted in the 2010s decade and the other two scales were developed earlier. Most scales are divided into 6 to 8 subscales and use an adjectival scale with either 4, 5 or 7 points. The content validity study of all scales in this review was deemed to be doubtful or inadequate quality. Reliability was almost exclusively assessed by calculating the internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha coefficient which gives no information on equivalence or stability of the measure. Responsiveness was never properly assessed in the reviewed studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence on the measurement properties for each scale regarding their validity and reliability; responsiveness was not assessed for any scale. Every scale evaluated in this review had different characteristics (length, subscales, response options). Therefore, selection of the most appropriate scale depends on the context and purpose of the assessment. Prospero registration number: CRD42018109711 Tweetable Abstract: Systematic review of scales measuring new nurses' competence: we must do better and conduct more validity/reliability testing of existing scales.

How does questioning influence nursing students' clinical reasoning in problem-based learning? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Problem-based learning is an educational method promoting clinical reasoning that has been implemented in many fields of health education. Questioning is a learning strategy often employed in problem-based learning sessions. AIM: To explore what is known about the influence of questioning on the promotion of clinical reasoning of students in health care education, specifically in the field of nursing and using the educational method of problem-based learning. METHODS: A scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley's five stages was conducted. The CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, Medline, and PubMed databases were searched for articles published between the years of 2000 and 2017. Each article was summarized and analyzed using a data extraction sheet in relation to its purpose, population group, setting, methods, and results. A descriptive explication of the studies based on an inductive analysis of their findings to address the aim of the review was made. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the analysis. The studies explored the influence of questioning on critical thinking rather than on clinical reasoning. The nature of the questions asked and the effect of higher-order questions on critical thinking were the most commonly occurring themes. Few studies addressed the use of questioning in problem-based learning. CONCLUSIONS: More empirical evidence is needed to gain a better understanding of the benefit of questioning in problem-based learning to promote students' clinical reasoning.