PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10076217

An update on the UKCC's work into higher level practice.

G Castledine
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the last specialist nursing supplement Sarah Waller described the background to the consultation process for recognizing and regulating a higher level of practice (Vol 7(16): 960-4). This article gives an overview of the responses to the consultation exercise and outlines what a higher level of practice will mean for the nursing profession. It was generally agreed that the present system of specialist practice is too complex and therefore confusing. In addition, the UKCC has recognized that professional practice has moved on since PREP and that there is a need to move away from a task-oriented and functionalist paradigm. It was also felt that the specialist framework is too narrow and does not cater for expert nurses who wish to stay in general, as opposed to specialist, clinical areas.

Explore related subjects

ConsultantsHumansLicensure, NursingSpecialties, NursingState MedicineUnited KingdomJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G Castledine. An update on the UKCC's work into higher level practice.. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.1998.7.22.5536

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends.

AIM: To evaluate current clinical practice in the UK in the management of the anophthalmic socket; choice of enucleation, evisceration, type of orbital implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. METHODS: All consultant ophthalmologists in the UK were surveyed by postal questionnaire. Questions included their practice subspecialty and number of enucleations and eviscerations performed in 2003. Specific questions addressed choice of implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. RESULTS: 456/896 (51%) consultants responded, of which 162 (35%) had a specific interest in oculoplastics, lacrimal, orbits or oncology. Only 243/456 (53%) did enucleations or eviscerations. 92% inserted an orbital implant after primary enucleation, 69% after non-endophthalmitis evisceration, whereas only 43% did so after evisceration for endophthalmitis (50% as a delayed procedure). 55% used porous orbital implants (porous polyethylene, hydroxyapatite or alumina) as their first choice and 42% used acrylic. Most implants inserted were spherical, sized 18-20 mm in diameter. 57% wrapped the implant after enucleation, using salvaged autogenous sclera (20%), donor sclera (28%) and synthetic Vicryl or Mersilene mesh (42%). A minority (7%) placed motility pegs in selected cases, usually as a secondary procedure. 14% of respondents reported implant exposure for each type of procedure and extrusion was reported by 4% after enucleation and 3% after evisceration. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights contemporary anophthalmic socket practice in the UK. Most surgeons use porous orbital implants with a synthetic wrap after enucleation and only few perform motility pegging.

Consultants↗