Background: Determining what constitutes an excellent allied health care professional (AHCP) is important, since this is what will guide the development of curricula for training future physical therapists, oral hygienists, speech therapists, diagnostic radiographers, and dietitians. This also determines the quality of care.Aim: To describe perspectives of AHCPs on which characteristics are commonly associated with an excellent AHCP.Methods: AHCPs’ perspectives were derived from three focus group discussions. Twenty-one health care professionals participated. The final analysis of the focus group discussions produced eight domains, in which content validity was obtained through a Delphi panel survey of 27 contributing experts.Results: According to the survey, a combination of the following characteristics defines an excellent AHCP: (1) cognizance, to obtain and to apply knowledge in a broad multidisciplinary health care field; (2) cooperativity, to effectively work with others in a multidisciplinary con¬text; (3) communicative, to communicate effectively at different levels in complex situations; (4) initiative, to initiate new ideas, to act proactively, and to follow them through; (5) innovative, to devise new ideas and to implement alternatives beyond current practices; (6) introspective, to self-examine and to reflect; (7) broad perspective, to capture the big picture; and (8) evidence-driven, to find and to use scientific evidence to guide one’s decisions.Conclusion: The AHCPs perspectives can be used as a reference for personal improvement for supervisors and professionals in clinical practice and for educational purposes. These perspectives may serve as a guide against which talented students can evaluate themselves.
Abstract Background: Healthcare professionals encounter ethical dilemmas and concerns in their practice. More research is needed to understand these ethical problems and to know how to educate professionals to respond to them. Research objective: To describe ethical dilemmas and concerns at work from the perspectives of Finnish and Dutch healthcare professionals studying at the master’s level. Research design: Exploratory, qualitative study that used the text of student online discussions of ethical dilemmas at work as data. Method: Participants’ online discussions were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Participants: The sample consisted of 49 students at master’s level enrolled in professional ethics courses at universities in Finland and the Netherlands. Ethical considerations: Permission for conducting the study was granted from both universities of applied sciences. All students provided their informed consent for the use of their assignments as research data. Findings: Participants described 51 problematic work situations. Among these, 16 were found to be ethical dilemmas, and the remaining were work issues with an ethical concern and did not meet criteria of a dilemma. The most common problems resulted from concerns about quality care, safety of healthcare professionals, patients’ rights, and working with too few staff and inadequate resources. Discussion: The results indicated that participants were concerned about providing quality of care and raised numerous questions about how to provide it in challenging situations. The results show that it was difficult for students to differentiate ethical dilemmas from other ethical work concerns. Conclusion: Online discussions among healthcare providers give them an opportunity to relate ethical principles to real ethical dilemmas and problems in their work as well as to critically analyze ethical issues. We found that discussions with descriptions of ethical dilemmas and concerns by health professionals provide important information and recommendations not only for education and practice but also for health policy.
AIM: This article describes the results of a study into the psychometric properties of a questionnaire about student nurses' perceptions of mental health care. The questionnaire was constructed in 2008, but has not yet been tested in terms of construct validity and reliability. A validated questionnaire is essential as a standardized method of analyzing student nurses' perceptions of mental health care.METHOD: To investigate the construct validity, an exploratory factor analysis was performed. Reliability was determined by measuring the internal consistency of the questionnaire.RESULTS: A principal component analysis (PCA) yielded a two-factor solution. The first factor comprised 9 items referring to the views of student nurses on psychiatric patients; the second factor comprised 6 items referring to the views of the students about professional careers in mental health care.CONCLUSION: The factor analysis and questionnaire produced two easily interpretable factors covering the same categories as those identified in the literature as determinants of a student nurse's choice for or against a career in mental health care. The questionnaire's construct validity was rated as sufficient, its reliability as acceptable. The problem is the low explained variance (25.6%). The usefulness of the questionnaire is therefore questionable. The usefulness might be improved through the expansion of some of the categories by additional items. Relevant suggestions are made in this article.
