Every healthcare professional (HCP) in the Netherlands is expected to provide palliative care based on their initial education. This requires national consensus and clarity on the quality and goals of palliative care education and accessible education opportunities nationwide. These requirements were not met in the Netherlands, posing a major obstacle to improving the organization and delivery of palliative care. Therefore, a program, Optimizing Education and Training in Palliative Care (O2PZ), was established to improve palliative care education on a national level.
MULTIFILE
Het Nederlandse onderwijssysteem kan beschouwd worden als ‘the hidden secret in education’ (Alma Harris). Weinig landen zijn in staat om hoge onderwijs kwaliteit te combineren met een grote mate van gelijke kansen. Daarmee kan Nederland naast gidslanden zoals Finland, Canada/Ontario en Singapore een inspiratiebron zijn voor andere landen. Met dit doel voor ogen is in mei 2017 het boek ’The Dutch way in education: Teach, learn and lead the Dutch way’ gepubliceerd. ‘because the Dutch score high on Pisa rankings, they top almost every chart on child well-being and have a high performing system with a good balance between equity and excellence. These are just a few aspects that indicate the Dutch society and its education has a lot of things to discover if you look more closely.’In dit boek worden de verworvenheden van het Nederlandse onderwijssysteem beschreven vanuit verschillende invalshoeken (klik hier voor de inhoudsopgave [https://www.thedutch-way.com/downloads/The_Dutch_Way_in_Education_tableofcontents.pdf]). Lector Marco Snoek heeft het hoofdstuk over de leraar in het Nederlandse schoolsysteem beschreven. In the Netherlands, as in every country in the world, the quality of education is an issue of major concern, as education is a key factor in maintaining and developing the economic and social stability of a country. It is a key responsibility of the government to maintain and develop that quality. After all, educational quality is not a static concept, as education needs to adapt itself continuously to changes and new needs in society. This chapter focuses on the way in which educational quality and development are supported in the Netherlands and the role teachers play in these. Three perspectives on that role are presented, one in which teachers are recipients from government measures and follow system structures and regulations, one in which individual teachers are seen as the key actors in defining and realizing educational quality and one in which educational quality is considered the result of close collaboration of teams of teachers. The chapter shows how government and local policies in the Netherlands have moved from the first to the second perspective and are now, slowly, evolving to the third perspective.Het boek is uitgegeven door Uitgeverij Onderwijs maak je Samen. Zie www.thedutch-way.com. Sinds november 2017 is er ook een Nederlandse vertaling beschikbaar: The Dutch Way. Leren, lesgeven en leiderschap in het Nederlandse Onderwijs.
Background: The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice. This article aims to describe the process evaluation of NitL. Methods: A mixed-methods formative process evaluation with a predominantly qualitative approach was conducted. Qualitative data were collected by interviews with community nurses (n = 7), focus groups with team members (n = 31), and reviewing seven implementation plans and 28 patient records. Quantitative data were collected among community nurses and team members (N = 90) using a questionnaire to assess barriers in encouraging functional activities and attendance lists. Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics and content analysis. Results: NitL was largely executed according to plan. Points of attention were the use and value of the background theory within the training, completion of implementation plans, and reporting in patient records by community nurses. Inhibiting factors for showing leadership and encouraging functional activities were a lack of time and a high complexity of care; facilitating factors were structure and clear communication within teams. Nurses considered the systematic approach useful and the training educational for their role. Most team members considered NitL practical and were satisfied with the coaching provided by community nurses. To optimise NitL, community nurses recommended providing the training first and extending the training. The team members recommended continuing clinical lessons, which were an implementation strategy from the community nurses. Conclusions: NitL was largely executed as planned, and appears worthy of further application in community care practice. However, adaptations are recommended to make NitL more promising in practice in empowering community nurse leadership in implementing evidence.
