Newly graduated registered nurses' evaluation of their preparedness, confidence and attitudes towards clinical assessments. Issue 7 (15th February 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Taylor, Peta; Hudson, Dianne; Thomson, Patricia; Greenlees‐Rae, Joanne
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical nursing. Volume 30:Issue 7/8(2021)
• Page Start: 929
• Page End: 941
• Publication Date: 2021-02-15
• Subjects: clinical education -- graduate nurses -- nursing assessment -- practice development -- technology -- theory‐practice gap -- vital signs; Nursing -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; 610.7305
• DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15621
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0962-1067

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Background: Historically, it has been reported that new graduates make limited use of their clinical assessment skills, yet these form the basis for making nursing decisions and selecting all nursing interventions. Aims and objectives: To explore new graduates' preparedness for, and confidence with, clinical assessment and their reliance on electronic monitoring. To identify barriers that hinder, and strategies that enable, clinical assessment. Design: A mixed‐method study comprising a cross‐sectional, quantitative survey and qualitative data, gathered using the World Café method. Methods: Data were collected from volunteers ( n = 137) of all new graduates ( n = 160) working in adult settings for a New Zealand district health board over a 1‐year period. A paper‐based survey explored use of clinical assessment, using a five‐point Likert scale. Qualitative data comprised written records of group discussions and individual responses to four questions with thematic analysis of results. A STROBE checklist was used. Results: Most ( n = 128) new graduates agreed/strongly agreed that clinical assessment was part of their role. Most ( n = 119) agreed/strongly agreed that assessing patients by technology alone was inadequate. Thirty‐six did not agree/strongly agree that they were well‐prepared to perform clinical assessment. Forty‐one did not agree/strongly agree that they were confident to perform clinical assessment, particularly those aged ≥30 years. Factors limiting use of clinical assessment were lack of time, knowledge, skill, confidence, reliance on doctors and an unsupportive work environment. Factors that would enhance clinical assessment involved increased supervision by experienced staff, provision of short courses and more in‐service education on clinical assessment. Conclusions: New graduates acknowledged that clinical assessment was part of their role and involved more than electronic monitoring. However, many lacked confidence and preparedness for clinical assessment in their work area, particularly those aged ≥30 years, potentially limiting clinical assessment use. Supportive changes, including short courses to revise clinical assessment skills and supervision of workplace‐specific clinical assessments, could help new graduates more confidently and efficiently assimilate clinical assessment into their practice. Relevance to Clinical Practice: This research identified reasons that caused a cohort of new graduates to make limited use of their clinical assessment skills. It also reports the practical solutions they considered would help them increase their use of clinical assessment and thus support their decision‐making in nursing practice.