TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of Nurse Practitioners' Professional Competence and Comparison of Assessments Using Multiple Methods
T2 - Self-Assessment, Peer Assessment, and Supervisor Assessment
AU - Liang, Hui Yu
AU - Tang, Fu In
AU - Wang, Tze Fang
AU - Yu, Shu
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - nurse practitioners
KW - professional competence
KW - self-assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100008725&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.anr.2020.10.004
DO - 10.1016/j.anr.2020.10.004
M3 - Article
C2 - 33249140
AN - SCOPUS:85100008725
SN - 1976-1317
VL - 15
SP - 30
EP - 36
JO - Asian Nursing Research
JF - Asian Nursing Research
IS - 1
ER -