Exploring communities of practice among medical-surgical nurses at King Khalid Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

S. Alsayed, Jennifer de Beer, Tahani Uyoni
{"title":"Exploring communities of practice among medical-surgical nurses at King Khalid Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia","authors":"S. Alsayed, Jennifer de Beer, Tahani Uyoni","doi":"10.4103/sccj.sccj_18_19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Communities of practices (CoPs) are a process in which workers interact and acquire knowledge from each other at the workplace. This informal knowledge in the workplace can assist professionals to become active knowledge builders with sufficient autonomy regarding specific knowledge or skills required. In addition, this approach that supports informal learning facilitates learning among nurses in the workplace. A cross-sectional descriptive design study was conducted to discover facilitators and barriers that affect the implementation of a CoPs approach. The results show that CoPs seemingly provides a forum for sharing on the job, allowing for successful transition and retention. This and other findings can help in improving and facilitating this approach widely among nurses at the workplace. Purpose: This study explored CoP among medical and surgical nurses at King Khalid Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. It also presents the facilitators and barriers in implementing the CoPs approach. Study Design: A cross-sectional descriptive design was used. Sixty-seven medical-surgical nurses were conveniently sampled at a military hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a structured, validated questionnaire. Methodology: Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis and were presented in frequencies, percentages, and P values. Results: A total of 62 nurses, mostly females, participated in this study. The mean age of respondents was 30.95 years, and N = 52 (83.9%) had a bachelor's degree in nursing, with N = 26 (41.9%) having between 5 and 10 years of experience in nursing. Most respondents (82.3%) had a clear understanding of what a CoP is. Most respondents N = 40 (64.5%) agreed that they wished to share their knowledge within the community. The top facilitators of a CoP as expressed by respondents were: to deliver solutions for daily problems N = 49 (79%) followed by N = 41 (66.1%) of respondents agreeing that CoP transfer best practices and results in the development of new knowledge N = 30 (48.4%). The most common barrier to a CoP identified within this study was lack of time as expressed by most participants N = 46 (74.2%), followed by a lack of confidence, N = 36 (58.1%) and a fear of not sharing correct information N = 31 (50%). Conclusion: This study described the facilitators and barriers of CoPs. Furthermore, the study highlighted the critique of CoP from the literature. Despite this critique, CoPs are found to provide a forum for sharing on the job, allowing for successful transition and retention.","PeriodicalId":345799,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Critical Care Journal","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Critical Care Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sccj.sccj_18_19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Communities of practices (CoPs) are a process in which workers interact and acquire knowledge from each other at the workplace. This informal knowledge in the workplace can assist professionals to become active knowledge builders with sufficient autonomy regarding specific knowledge or skills required. In addition, this approach that supports informal learning facilitates learning among nurses in the workplace. A cross-sectional descriptive design study was conducted to discover facilitators and barriers that affect the implementation of a CoPs approach. The results show that CoPs seemingly provides a forum for sharing on the job, allowing for successful transition and retention. This and other findings can help in improving and facilitating this approach widely among nurses at the workplace. Purpose: This study explored CoP among medical and surgical nurses at King Khalid Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. It also presents the facilitators and barriers in implementing the CoPs approach. Study Design: A cross-sectional descriptive design was used. Sixty-seven medical-surgical nurses were conveniently sampled at a military hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a structured, validated questionnaire. Methodology: Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis and were presented in frequencies, percentages, and P values. Results: A total of 62 nurses, mostly females, participated in this study. The mean age of respondents was 30.95 years, and N = 52 (83.9%) had a bachelor's degree in nursing, with N = 26 (41.9%) having between 5 and 10 years of experience in nursing. Most respondents (82.3%) had a clear understanding of what a CoP is. Most respondents N = 40 (64.5%) agreed that they wished to share their knowledge within the community. The top facilitators of a CoP as expressed by respondents were: to deliver solutions for daily problems N = 49 (79%) followed by N = 41 (66.1%) of respondents agreeing that CoP transfer best practices and results in the development of new knowledge N = 30 (48.4%). The most common barrier to a CoP identified within this study was lack of time as expressed by most participants N = 46 (74.2%), followed by a lack of confidence, N = 36 (58.1%) and a fear of not sharing correct information N = 31 (50%). Conclusion: This study described the facilitators and barriers of CoPs. Furthermore, the study highlighted the critique of CoP from the literature. Despite this critique, CoPs are found to provide a forum for sharing on the job, allowing for successful transition and retention.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索在吉达,沙特阿拉伯哈立德国王医院医疗外科护士的实践社区
背景:实践社区(cop)是工人在工作场所相互作用并从彼此获取知识的过程。工作场所的非正式知识可以帮助专业人员成为积极的知识建设者,对所需的特定知识或技能有足够的自主权。此外,这种支持非正式学习的方法有助于护士在工作场所的学习。进行了一项横断面描述性设计研究,以发现影响cop方法实施的促进因素和障碍。结果表明,cop似乎提供了一个分享工作的论坛,允许成功的过渡和保留。这一发现和其他发现有助于在工作场所的护士中广泛改进和促进这一方法。目的:本研究探讨沙特阿拉伯吉达哈立德国王医院内科和外科护士的CoP。报告还介绍了实施缔约方会议方法的促进因素和障碍。研究设计:采用横断面描述性设计。在沙特阿拉伯吉达的一家军事医院方便地抽取了67名内科外科护士。数据收集采用结构化的,有效的问卷调查。方法:采用描述性和推断性统计进行数据分析,并以频率、百分比和P值表示。结果:共有62名护士参与本研究,其中以女性为主。受访者平均年龄30.95岁,52人(83.9%)具有护理专业本科学历,26人(41.9%)具有5 - 10年护理经验。大多数受访者(82.3%)清楚了解CoP是什么。大多数受访者(N = 40)(64.5%)同意他们希望在社区内分享他们的知识。受访者表示,缔约方会议的主要促进因素是:为日常问题提供解决方案N = 49(79%),其次是N = 41(66.1%)的受访者同意缔约方会议转移最佳实践并导致新知识的发展N = 30(48.4%)。在本研究中,大多数参与者(N = 46(74.2%))表示,CoP最常见的障碍是缺乏时间,其次是缺乏信心(N = 36(58.1%))和害怕不分享正确的信息(N = 31(50%))。结论:本研究描述了cop的促进因素和障碍。此外,该研究强调了文献中对CoP的批评。尽管有这样的批评,但人们发现cop提供了一个分享工作的论坛,允许成功的过渡和保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Antibiotic Treatment Duration for Bloodstream Infections in Critically Ill Patients: A National Survey of Kuwaiti Infectious Diseases and Critical Care Specialists Characteristics and outcomes of adolescents requiring admission to the intensive care unit: A retrospective cohort study Antibiotic treatment duration for bloodstream infections in critically ill patients: A national survey of Kuwaiti infectious diseases and critical care specialists Use of critical care ultrasound in Saudi Arabia: Questionnaire analysis Effects of different regimens of sedation on mechanically ventilated patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1