IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v21y2012i17-18p2679-2689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of nurse practitioners’ perceptions of required competencies and self‐evaluated competencies in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • I‐Wen Chang
  • Yea‐Ing Shyu
  • Pei‐Kwei Tsay
  • Woung‐Ru Tang

Abstract

Aims and objectives. This paper is a report of a study conducted to investigate differences between nurse practitioners’ perceptions of the importance of required competencies and their self‐evaluated existing competencies, and the main factors influencing these differences. Background. The difference between nurse practitioners’ perceptions of required competencies and their existing competencies has never been investigated. Therefore, it is still uncertain whether these two competencies differ. Design. A nationwide survey study was authorised by the Department of Health (DOH) in Taiwan. Methods. For this nationwide survey study, the Questionnaire of Competencies in the Nurse Practitioner’s Role was mailed to all nurse practitioners who qualified for the first annual national NP licence exam in Taiwan. Of 582 questionnaires distributed, 374 valid questionnaires were returned for a response rate of 64·2%. Results. The scores for required competencies were all higher than existing competencies. The competencies with largest differences were (in increasing order) clinical research, direct care, and leadership and reform. The competencies with smallest differences were (in ascending order) medical assistance, communication and coordination, and ethical decision‐making. Differences in the total score between required and existing competencies were significantly influenced by nurse practitioners’ age, seniority as nurse practitioner, whether the nurse practitioners’ institution had a nurse practitioner advancement system, and the number of patients under their care. Conclusions. Nurse practitioners’ perceptions of the importance of their expected role competencies were significantly greater in most cases than their actual competencies. Relevance to clinical practice. These findings could serve as a reference to improve cultivation of the NP system in Taiwan, to strengthen professional competencies in NP training programs.

Suggested Citation

  • I‐Wen Chang & Yea‐Ing Shyu & Pei‐Kwei Tsay & Woung‐Ru Tang, 2012. "Comparison of nurse practitioners’ perceptions of required competencies and self‐evaluated competencies in Taiwan," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(17‐18), pages 2679-2689, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:21:y:2012:i:17-18:p:2679-2689
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04186.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04186.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2012.04186.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:21:y:2012:i:17-18:p:2679-2689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.