Ann Marie Hart1, Carol L Macnee. 1. Fay W. Whitney School of Nursing, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071, USA. annmhart@uwyo.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perceived preparedness of nurse practitioners (NPs) for practice after completing their basic NP educational programs and to evaluate NPs' perceived preparedness in and their perceived importance of select clinical content areas basic to NP education. DATA SOURCES: This cross-sectional descriptive study used a written questionnaire consisting of 32 items, two of which contained 25 subitems. Subjects were asked to rate their overall level of preparedness when they completed their NP program and both their level of preparation in and the importance of 25 clinical content areas. The questionnaires were administered to attendees at two large national NP conferences in 2004; a total of 562 questionnaires were completed and used in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Ten percent of the sample perceived that they were very well prepared for practice as an NP after completing their basic NP education. Fifty-one percent perceived that they were only somewhat or minimally prepared. Current age, years since graduation from an NP program, and age when attending the NP program did not differ significantly for those who felt prepared versus those who did not. For a number of content areas, subjects did not perceive that they were well prepared in the same areas that they perceived were very important. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our results indicate that formal NP education is not preparing new NPs to feel ready for practice and suggests several areas where NP educational programs need to be strengthened. Practicing NPs are the basis of the NP profession, and their views need to be sought, listened to, and reflected upon as we advance toward expanded preparation at the doctoral level.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perceived preparedness of nurse practitioners (NPs) for practice after completing their basic NP educational programs and to evaluate NPs' perceived preparedness in and their perceived importance of select clinical content areas basic to NP education. DATA SOURCES: This cross-sectional descriptive study used a written questionnaire consisting of 32 items, two of which contained 25 subitems. Subjects were asked to rate their overall level of preparedness when they completed their NP program and both their level of preparation in and the importance of 25 clinical content areas. The questionnaires were administered to attendees at two large national NP conferences in 2004; a total of 562 questionnaires were completed and used in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Ten percent of the sample perceived that they were very well prepared for practice as an NP after completing their basic NP education. Fifty-one percent perceived that they were only somewhat or minimally prepared. Current age, years since graduation from an NP program, and age when attending the NP program did not differ significantly for those who felt prepared versus those who did not. For a number of content areas, subjects did not perceive that they were well prepared in the same areas that they perceived were very important. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our results indicate that formal NP education is not preparing new NPs to feel ready for practice and suggests several areas where NP educational programs need to be strengthened. Practicing NPs are the basis of the NP profession, and their views need to be sought, listened to, and reflected upon as we advance toward expanded preparation at the doctoral level.
Authors: Michelangelo Bartolo; Chiara Zucchella; Andrea Pace; Alessandro Marco De Nunzio; Mariano Serrao; Giorgio Sandrini; Francesco Pierelli Journal: J Exp Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-10-02