Hui Yu Liang1, Fu In Tang2, Tze Fang Wang2, Shu Yu3. 1. School of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, Taipai, Taiwan. 2. School of Nursing, National Yang Ming University, Taipai, Taiwan. 3. School of Nursing, National Yang Ming University, Taipai, Taiwan. Electronic address: yushu@ym.edu.tw.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Nurse practitioners (NPs) are increasingly important in healthcare as they play a key role in leading advanced nursing practices. Assessing their professional competence is essential. The aim of this study was to evaluate NPs' professional competencies based on at a collaborative model around NP self and compare different methods of assessment. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, and a purposive sample of 211 participants in the teaching hospital was used. Methods used were self-assessment (nurse practitioners), peer assessment (physicians and nurses) and supervisor assessment (head nurses). RESULTS: The competence of nurse practitioners was rated as moderate (mean score = 3.45 of a possible 5; SD = 0.59). However, each method resulted in differences in competence for total scores and dimensions. The highest competence was in direct patient care (mean = 3.55, SD = 0.53), and the lowest score was in monitoring the quality of patient care (mean = 3.30, SD = 0.82). post hoc analysis shown that supervisor assessment rated professional competence significantly lower than the method of self-assessment and peer assessment (F = 10.07, p < .001). CONCLUSION: NPs require an increased effort to continuous learning for enhancing professional competencies. Moreover, using multiple methods for assessment to obtain a more comprehensive and accurate evaluation of NPs' professional competence.
PURPOSE: Nurse practitioners (NPs) are increasingly important in healthcare as they play a key role in leading advanced nursing practices. Assessing their professional competence is essential. The aim of this study was to evaluate NPs' professional competencies based on at a collaborative model around NP self and compare different methods of assessment. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, and a purposive sample of 211 participants in the teaching hospital was used. Methods used were self-assessment (nurse practitioners), peer assessment (physicians and nurses) and supervisor assessment (head nurses). RESULTS: The competence of nurse practitioners was rated as moderate (mean score = 3.45 of a possible 5; SD = 0.59). However, each method resulted in differences in competence for total scores and dimensions. The highest competence was in direct patient care (mean = 3.55, SD = 0.53), and the lowest score was in monitoring the quality of patient care (mean = 3.30, SD = 0.82). post hoc analysis shown that supervisor assessment rated professional competence significantly lower than the method of self-assessment and peer assessment (F = 10.07, p < .001). CONCLUSION: NPs require an increased effort to continuous learning for enhancing professional competencies. Moreover, using multiple methods for assessment to obtain a more comprehensive and accurate evaluation of NPs' professional competence.