Perceptions of confidence among Saudi nursing interns during internship program: cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Saudi nursing students are trained in theoretical and clinical nursing competencies for four years before transition to newly graduated nurses through a one-year internship program. The transition period is crucial as nursing students have low confidence without adequate clinical experience. OBJECTIVES: Validate and culturally adapt the Arabic version of the Self-Efficacy for Clinical Evaluation Scale (SECS) and explore nursing interns perceived confidence (self-efficacy). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Four public tertiary training hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A survey was conducted among nursing interns. Validity, reliability, and the cultural relevance of the Arabic-translated instrument was determined. Tests for differences and correlations were undertaken. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived self-efficacy and importance of learning objectives. SAMPLE SIZE: 300 Saudi nursing interns. RESULTS: The Arabic version of SECS was successfully adapted crossculturally and was valid. Reliability tests showed Cronbach's alpha=.95 for confidence and Cronbach's alpha=0.96 for the importance subscales. The overall mean (SD) for perceived confidence and importance of clinical evaluation were 3.7 (0.9) and 4.1 (0.8), respectively. Gender (P<.001), length of internship (P=.009), and training hospital (P<.001) were significantly correlated and had a medium effect size with perceived self-efficacy. CONCLUSION: Gaining knowledge that the gender, length of internship and area of training affect the perceptions of the Saudi nursing interns towards self-efficacy can help preceptors formulate better strategies in developing nursing intern competence and gaining self-efficacy as they move from the academic to clinical nursing practice. The knowledge gathered in this study should be beneficial to nursing administrators, faculty, and mentors/preceptors. LIMITATIONS: Results may not be generalizable due to the limitations in the setting and there are other factors not included in the study that may have explained variances in perceived self-efficacy.