Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8505432

The nurse's multiple commitments.

M C Corley·H O Mauksch
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Nurses have multiple commitments: organizational, work, professional, job, patient, and personnel. Research has focused almost exclusively on organizational commitment and, to a lesser extent, on professional and job commitment. This fragmented approach to the study of the nurse's commitments neglects the nurse's commitment to patients. The concept of commitment needs to be clarified so that knowledge derived from research on commitment enhances our understanding of how nurses manage these multiple commitments.

Explore related subjects

Clinical CompetenceHumansNursesNursing CarePatient AdvocacyProfessional CompetenceProfessional-Family RelationsSocial ResponsibilityJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M C Corley, H O Mauksch. The nurse's multiple commitments.. https://doi.org/10.1016/8755-7223(93)90028-b

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1997

Determination of the learning curve of the AESOP robot.

BACKGROUND: As the variety of procedures performed with laparoscopic technology increases, the skill levels and equipment demands also increase. Laparoscopic appendectomy, hernia repair, colon resection, and Nissen fundoplication all require someone whose only responsibility is to control the laparoscope and therefore the operative field. This is usually the most inexperienced person on the operating team. The Automated Endoscope System for Optimal Positioning (AESOP) robot provides a means to eliminate the need for the camera person, returns control of the camera and operative field to the operating surgeon, and enhances human performance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acquisition of skills to control the laparoscope in a satisfactory fashion. METHODS: We selected medical students as our study group because they have no prior experience in laparoscopic procedures. They performed a readily reproducible task in a pelvic trainer with hand control and with the AESOP robot. Their initial times are compared, as is the improvement in their times after 10 min of practice with the AESOP robot. RESULTS: These data show that in this study group use of the AESOP robot was not as fast as hand control but the skill to use it was learned as quickly. Additional features of the robut such as a steady view and the ability to acquire images and return to them reliably are other advantages. CONCLUSION: The AESOP robotic arm provides a stable support for the laparoscope during laparoscopic procedures which can be manipulated by the surgeon. We found that the time required to learn control of the laparoscope manually and with the AESOP robot is equal.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1997

Training for Norplant implant removal: assessment of learning curves and competency.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the learning curves and rapidity with which clinicians become competent in implant removal using two Norplant removal techniques. METHODS: Twenty-four physicians, none of whom were experienced in the use of Norplant implants, were randomly assigned to learn either the "U" removal technique or the standard technique. The physicians in the two groups received identical training in all other respects. Each physician then performed ten supervised removals. Removal times, procedure problem rates, and the number of procedures performed by the clinicians before they were judged "competent" were assessed for both groups. RESULTS: Data from 240 removals were analyzed. Mean removal times were 38% faster in the "U" group than in the standard group. None of the "U" group procedures took longer than 20 minutes, compared with 11% of removals in the standard group (P < .001). The mean number of cases required before the provider consistently performed all steps adequately was significantly (P < .02) higher in the standard group (5.8 cases) than in the "U" group (3.9 cases). CONCLUSIONS: Using competency-based training methods, the "U" removal technique was learned easily by inexperienced clinicians. It appears to offer significant improvements in speed and achievement of proficiency over the standard technique recommended by the manufacturer. Large-scale programs should consider using competency-based training and the "U" technique as the removal method of choice when providing training in implant removal.

Clinical Competence↗