背景:大多数护理管理者并不完全了解第二受害者,并且可能无法提供支持。此外,护理经理关于第二受害者的培训课程相对较少。
目的:描述护理管理者第二受害者课程的构建和评估。
方法:采用单组前测-后测研究设计。
方法:中国拥有3000多张床位的大型综合性三甲医院。
方法:符合纳入和排除标准的49名护理管理者参加了本次培训。还邀请了16名在培训后三个月内出现不良事件的临床一线护士。
方法:通过文献综述和专家咨询开发了“第二受害者和同理心沟通”课程,包括4个单元模块:(1)不良事件和第二受害者,(2)第二受害者的康复轨迹,(3)第二受害者支持资源,(4)移情沟通的关键策略。课程评估问卷,护理管理者的移情沟通问卷,第二份受害者评估问卷,用一个开放式的问题来衡量可行性,课程的可接受性和有效性。
结果:>97.96%的护理管理者对课程满意,>97.96%的人学习了新知识,>95.92%的人改变了对第二受害者的行为和态度。他们的移情沟通水平在训练前后有显著差异(t=-2.170,P=0.035)。在这些护理管理者中,二十六名参与者通过回答一个不限成员名额的问题,为课程提供了积极和有意义的反馈和建议。共有66.6%至100%的第二受害者对护理管理者表现出的移情沟通行为感到满意。
结论:第二受害者培训课程是可行的,可用于临床培训,以提高护理管理者对第二受害者的理解,并加强他们的移情沟通。
BACKGROUND: Most nursing managers are not fully aware of second victims and may not be able to provide support. Moreover, there are relatively few training courses for nursing managers about second victims.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the construction and evaluation of a second victim course for nursing managers.
METHODS: A single-group pretest-posttest study design was used.
METHODS: A large comprehensive tertiary hospital with over 3000 beds in China.
METHODS: Forty-nine nursing managers who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria participated in this training. Sixteen clinical frontline nurses who experienced adverse events within three months following the training were also invited.
METHODS: The course \"Second Victim & Empathy Communication\" was developed through a literature review and expert consultation and consisted of 4 unit modules: (1) adverse events & second victims, (2) the recovery trajectory of second victims, (3) second victim supportive resources, and (4) key strategies of empathy communication. A course evaluation questionnaire, an empathy communication questionnaire for nursing managers, a second victim evaluation questionnaire, and an open-ended question were used to measure the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of the course.
RESULTS: >97.96 % of the nursing managers were satisfied with the course, >97.96 % had learned new knowledge, and >95.92 % had changed their behavior and attitudes toward second victims. Their levels of empathetic communication differed significantly before and after training (t = -2.170, P = 0.035). Among these nursing managers, twenty-six participants provided positive and meaningful feedback and suggestions to the course by answering an open-ended question. A total of 66.6 % to 100 % of second victims were satisfied with the empathetic communication behavior exhibited by nursing managers.
CONCLUSIONS: The second victim training course is feasible and can be used for clinical training to enhance nursing managers\' understanding of second victims and enhance their empathetic communication.