Attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers in research of nurses of the Canary Health Service

Héctor González-de la Torre , David Díaz-Pérez , Ricardo José Pinto-Plasencia , Begoña Reyero-Ortega , Elizabeth Hernández-González , Conrado Domínguez-Trujillo
{"title":"Attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers in research of nurses of the Canary Health Service","authors":"Héctor González-de la Torre ,&nbsp;David Díaz-Pérez ,&nbsp;Ricardo José Pinto-Plasencia ,&nbsp;Begoña Reyero-Ortega ,&nbsp;Elizabeth Hernández-González ,&nbsp;Conrado Domínguez-Trujillo","doi":"10.1016/j.enfcle.2023.05.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers associated with research among nurses and midwives of the Canary Health Service (SCS).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Descriptive observational cross-sectional study with an analytical component carried out in the different SCS departments by means of an online survey in which sociodemographic and specific variables, the Spanish version of the Attitudes towards Research and Development within Nursing Questionnaire (ATRDNQ-e) instrument and the BARRIERS scale were collected. Authorisation was obtained from the two provincial ethics committees. A descriptive and inferential analysis (Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis test, post hoc contrast by Dwass–Steel–Critchlow–Fligne test) was performed with JAMOVI® v.2.3.24 software.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 512 nurses and midwives with a mean age of 41.82 years participated in the study. Regarding the scores with the ATRDNQ-e instrument, the dimension with the lowest score was «Language of research» (mean = 3.55/SD = 0.84) and the highest «Assessment of nursing research and development of the nursing discipline» (mean = 4.54/SD = 0.52). The total mean score with the BARRIERS scale was 54.33 (SD = 16.52), with «Organizational characteristics» being the highest scoring subscale (mean = 17.25/SD = 5.90). The two highest perceived barriers were «Not enough time at work to implement new ideas» (mean = 2.55/SD = 1.11) and «Nursing does not have time to read research» (mean = 2.46/ SD = 1.11).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>SCS nurses have a positive attitude towards research, although there are some barriers where improvement actions for nursing research should be implemented.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72917,"journal":{"name":"Enfermeria clinica (English Edition)","volume":"33 4","pages":"Pages 278-291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enfermeria clinica (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2445147923000383","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

Objective

To evaluate the attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers associated with research among nurses and midwives of the Canary Health Service (SCS).

Methods

Descriptive observational cross-sectional study with an analytical component carried out in the different SCS departments by means of an online survey in which sociodemographic and specific variables, the Spanish version of the Attitudes towards Research and Development within Nursing Questionnaire (ATRDNQ-e) instrument and the BARRIERS scale were collected. Authorisation was obtained from the two provincial ethics committees. A descriptive and inferential analysis (Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis test, post hoc contrast by Dwass–Steel–Critchlow–Fligne test) was performed with JAMOVI® v.2.3.24 software.

Results

A total of 512 nurses and midwives with a mean age of 41.82 years participated in the study. Regarding the scores with the ATRDNQ-e instrument, the dimension with the lowest score was «Language of research» (mean = 3.55/SD = 0.84) and the highest «Assessment of nursing research and development of the nursing discipline» (mean = 4.54/SD = 0.52). The total mean score with the BARRIERS scale was 54.33 (SD = 16.52), with «Organizational characteristics» being the highest scoring subscale (mean = 17.25/SD = 5.90). The two highest perceived barriers were «Not enough time at work to implement new ideas» (mean = 2.55/SD = 1.11) and «Nursing does not have time to read research» (mean = 2.46/ SD = 1.11).

Conclusions

SCS nurses have a positive attitude towards research, although there are some barriers where improvement actions for nursing research should be implemented.

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
金丝雀卫生服务中心护士的态度、能力和感知障碍研究
目的了解加纳利卫生服务中心(SCS)护士和助产士对研究的态度、能力和感知障碍。方法通过收集社会人口学和特定变量、西班牙语版护理人员对研究和发展的态度问卷(ATRDNQ-e)和障碍量表的在线调查,在不同SCS科室进行描述性观察性横断面研究,并辅以分析成分。获得了两个省级伦理委员会的授权。采用JAMOVI®v.2.3.24软件进行描述性和推理分析(Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验,事后对比采用Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligne检验)。结果共512名护士和助产士参与研究,平均年龄41.82岁。在ATRDNQ-e量表得分方面,得分最低的维度是“研究语言”(mean = 3.55/SD = 0.84),得分最高的维度是“护理学科的研究与发展评估”(mean = 4.54/SD = 0.52)。障碍量表的总平均得分为54.33 (SD = 16.52),其中“组织特征”是得分最高的子量表(平均值= 17.25/SD = 5.90)。两个最高的障碍是“没有足够的工作时间来实施新想法”(平均= 2.55/SD = 1.11)和“护理人员没有时间阅读研究”(平均= 2.46/ SD = 1.11)。结论scs护士对护理研究的态度是积极的,但仍存在一些障碍,需要采取改进措施。
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
Quality of life and spiritual needs of patients diagnosed with cancer in a tertiary hospital in southwestern Nigeria Effectiveness of implementing a Best Practice Guideline recommendations to manage pain in oncological hospitalized patients Proposed therapeutic and care approach in a patient with chronic prurigo: Clinical case Artificial intelligence as a tool for error prevention in clinical care Rasch analysis implementation in nursing research: A methodological approach
×
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