A review of critical care nursing staffing, education and practice standards

被引:34
作者
Gill, Fenella J. [1 ,2 ]
Leslie, Gavin D. [3 ]
Grech, Carol [4 ]
Latour, Jos M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Curtin Univ Technol, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, GPO, Fac Hlth Sci, Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
[2] Princess Margaret Hosp Children, Child & Adolescent Hlth Serv, Perth, WA 6840, Australia
[3] Curtin Univ Technol, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Curtin Hlth, Innovat Res Inst,Fac Hlth Sci, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
[4] Univ S Australia, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
[5] Erasmus MC Sophia Childrens Hosp, Dept Pediat Intens Care Neonatol, NL-3000 CB Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Critical care; Qualifications; Staffing ratios; Education: Standards; NEXT-GENERATION; AUSTRALIA; MORTALITY; PATIENT; SAFETY; ERRORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.aucc.2011.12.056
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
The aim of this paper is to review the differences and similarities in critical care nursing staffing, education and practice standards in the US, Canada, UK, New Zealand and Australia. Search methods: A university library discovery catalogue, Science Direct, Scopus databases and professional websites were searched. Key terms used included, critical care, specialist, standards, competency, practice, scope, workforce, staffing, ratios, qualifications, adverse events, and patient outcomes. The search was limited to articles that referred to critical care environments including paediatric and neonatal settings. Results: The database and hand search identified 40 relevant articles. Website searching resulted in a further 36 documents. A diversity of critical care nursing contexts and a lack of comparable workforce data made it difficult to quantify differences and similarities between countries. There is a general consensus about the importance of optimum staffing by registered nurses with a proportion of those holding relevant post-registration qualifications although there is no consistency in defining the educational preparation for a 'qualified' critical care nurse. Critical care nursing standards for the US, Canada, UK and New Zealand were predominantly developed by expert panels while the Australian standards were developed with a multi-methods study including observations of practice. All five standards documents were built upon national entry-to-practice nurse standards and contained similar constructs, although there was no construct common to all of the standards. Conclusion: There is a lack of evidence to support nursing staffing with post registration specialty qualifications. Existing standards are predominantly opinion based rather than supported by research. The expected standards for nursing practice are fundamentally similar. (C) 2012 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Australia (a division of Reed International Books Australia Pty Ltd). All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:224 / 237
页数:14
相关论文
共 82 条
[1]  
Aitken Leanne M, 2006, Aust Crit Care, V19, P46, DOI 10.1016/S1036-7314(06)80009-3
[2]  
Amer Assoc Critical Care Nurses, 2003, AM J CRIT CARE, V12, P154
[3]  
American Association of Critical Care Nurses, 2008, AACN SCOP STAND AC C
[4]  
[Anonymous], PROF STAND
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2006, National competency standards for the registered nurse
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Nursing: Scope and standards of practice
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2005, DECL MADR POS STAT P
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2003, NURS MIDW FORC HLTH
[9]  
[Anonymous], COMP STAND SPEC CRIT
[10]  
[Anonymous], CRIT CAR NURS WORKF