Curriculum trends in nurse-midwifery education

Janis P Bellack RN, PhD (FAAN) , David Graber PhD , Edward H O’Neil PhD , Catherine Musham PhD
{"title":"Curriculum trends in nurse-midwifery education","authors":"Janis P Bellack RN, PhD (FAAN) ,&nbsp;David Graber PhD ,&nbsp;Edward H O’Neil PhD ,&nbsp;Catherine Musham PhD","doi":"10.1016/S0091-2182(98)00031-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>/ %The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which nurse-midwifery education programs are addressing the practice competencies that have been recommended by the Pew Health Professions Commission and others as essential for effective practice in the 21<sup>st</sup> century. This study was part of a larger survey of eleven health professions education programs. The 56 nurse-midwifery program directors whose names and addresses were provided by the American College of Nurse-Midwives were surveyed by mailed questionnaire, with a response rate of 59% (<em>n</em> = 33). The study sought to identify current and ideal emphasis placed on 33 broad topics, most important curriculum topics, and barriers to curriculum change as perceived by respondents. Findings revealed that nurse-midwifery program directors would like to see greater emphasis placed on every topic except one (tertiary/quaternary care). Desired increases ranged from .04 to 1.36. The overall mean rating for all topics was 3.51 for current emphasis (5-point scale) and 4.18 for ideal emphasis, both of which were higher than any other survey group. The greatest desired increases (&gt; 1.00) were for “primary care,” “managed care,” “use of electronic information systems,” and “business management of practice.” Respondents identified “primary care,” “health promotion/disease prevention,” and “accountability for cost-effectiveness and patient outcomes” as the most important topics. The top three barriers to curriculum change were identified as “already crowded curriculum,” “inadequate funding,” and “limited availability of clinical learning sites,” the last being statistically significant compared with other survey groups. Findings indicate that nurse-midwifery program directors perceived that they are adequately addressing most of the curriculum topics, while continuing to focus on the need for curriculum change as the health care environment changes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16670,"journal":{"name":"Journal of nurse-midwifery","volume":"43 5","pages":"Pages 341-350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0091-2182(98)00031-7","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of nurse-midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091218298000317","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

/ %The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which nurse-midwifery education programs are addressing the practice competencies that have been recommended by the Pew Health Professions Commission and others as essential for effective practice in the 21st century. This study was part of a larger survey of eleven health professions education programs. The 56 nurse-midwifery program directors whose names and addresses were provided by the American College of Nurse-Midwives were surveyed by mailed questionnaire, with a response rate of 59% (n = 33). The study sought to identify current and ideal emphasis placed on 33 broad topics, most important curriculum topics, and barriers to curriculum change as perceived by respondents. Findings revealed that nurse-midwifery program directors would like to see greater emphasis placed on every topic except one (tertiary/quaternary care). Desired increases ranged from .04 to 1.36. The overall mean rating for all topics was 3.51 for current emphasis (5-point scale) and 4.18 for ideal emphasis, both of which were higher than any other survey group. The greatest desired increases (> 1.00) were for “primary care,” “managed care,” “use of electronic information systems,” and “business management of practice.” Respondents identified “primary care,” “health promotion/disease prevention,” and “accountability for cost-effectiveness and patient outcomes” as the most important topics. The top three barriers to curriculum change were identified as “already crowded curriculum,” “inadequate funding,” and “limited availability of clinical learning sites,” the last being statistically significant compared with other survey groups. Findings indicate that nurse-midwifery program directors perceived that they are adequately addressing most of the curriculum topics, while continuing to focus on the need for curriculum change as the health care environment changes.

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
护理助产教育的课程发展趋势
/%本研究的目的是确定护士助产教育项目在多大程度上解决了皮尤健康专业委员会和其他机构建议的对21世纪有效实践至关重要的实践能力。这项研究是对11个卫生专业教育项目进行的更大规模调查的一部分。采用邮寄问卷的方式对美国助产士学院提供姓名和地址的56名助产士项目负责人进行了调查,回答率为59%(n=33)。该研究试图确定当前和理想的重点是33个广泛的主题,最重要的课程主题,以及受访者认为的课程改革障碍。调查结果显示,护士助产项目负责人希望看到除了一个主题(三级/四级护理)之外的每一个主题都得到更多的重视。期望的增长范围从.04到1.36。所有主题的总体平均评分为当前重点3.51分(5分制)和理想重点4.18分,两者都高于任何其他调查组。预期增幅最大(>;1.00)的是“初级保健”、“管理式护理”、“电子信息系统的使用”和“实践的商业管理”。受访者认为“初级保健、”健康促进/疾病预防“和”成本效益和患者结果的问责“是最重要的主题。课程改革的前三大障碍被确定为“课程已经拥挤”、“资金不足”和“临床学习场所有限”,最后一个障碍与其他调查组相比具有统计学意义。研究结果表明,护士助产项目负责人认为,他们充分解决了大多数课程主题,同时随着医疗保健环境的变化,继续关注课程改革的必要性。
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
Obstetric triage in 10 U.S. midwifery practices. The utilization of nurse-midwives as providers of obstetric triage services. Results of a national survey. A state-of-the-profession report on midwifery in the managed care market. Mammalian birth. Cesarean section (VBAC) not safe.
×
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