PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 2723873

Performance skill evaluations for i.v. nurses.

Abstract

The ability to evaluate and document the skills of the professional I.V. nurse can be more than an idealistic fantasy. It is essential to understand the purpose of evaluations and to provide an effective tool to reach the goals of improving performance and documenting the quality of care provided. Having accomplished these basic steps, one can apply the use of the evaluation tool in peer review processes such as quality assurance, skill validations, policy and procedure review and revision, and staff education.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D M Czapracki. Performance skill evaluations for i.v. nurses.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2723873/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A professional response to demands for accountability: practical recommendations regarding ethical aspects of patient care. Working Group on Accountability.

Forceful new demands for accountability in medicine are arising from many interested parties. To maintain professional standards, physicians need to establish which demands are desirable and which are not. We adopt a model of stratified accountability that includes three major components: the accountable parties, the subject matter, and the processes for accountability. To begin describing the model, we focus on physicians and health care institutions. We focus on the ethical dimensions of medical practice, both because the difficulty of measuring such behaviors makes this a test case for accountability and because of the importance of ethical standards in maintaining patient trust. We first identify eight widely endorsed content areas for accountability in ethical conduct: medical decision making, confidentiality, fiduciary obligations (including conflicts of interest), responsibilities arising from patient vulnerability, personal standards, equity among patients, cultural representation, and procedures for resolving dilemmas. We then identify the currently most valid and reliable methods for assessing conduct: surveys among all involved parties, testing methods used for accreditation, limited audits, publication of policy, and careful use of report cards. A prototypical survey and report card are illustrated. However, we also note the need for improved accountability assessment methods. We next identify mechanisms for taking responsibility: sharing information, exchanging perspectives, making adjustments, and enforcing standards when necessary. Finally, because this report only begins to describe a small part of the accountability model, we urge explicit identification and development of professional standards for accountability in the many other areas of medicine.

Clinical Competence