Cross-sectional study assesses training and professional status of emergency specialist nurses, indicating areas for improvement.
Emergency specialist nurses play a critical role in improving the quality of emergency care and enhancing patient satisfaction. In China, there is a growing need to systematically evaluate the training and deployment of these nurses to better inform educational and managerial policymaking. This cross-sectional study, conducted in Jiangsu Province between December 2021 and February 2022, sought to comprehensively investigate the training experiences and professional status of emergency specialist nurses. Specific objectives included: assessing perceptions of the training program, including curriculum design, faculty composition, and instructional methods; identifying post-training developments in core competencies and career trajectories; and exploring key challenges and support mechanisms in their current practice. A convenience sample of 567 certified nurses completed a structured questionnaire. Key findings revealed that 63.8% of participants called for the inclusion of experienced clinicians in the training faculty, while 72.5% identified nursing research and teaching as the most needed areas for reinforcement. Only 48.5% regarded online teaching as effective. Training coordination was primarily managed by head nurses (71.4%). Although participants reported substantial improvements in clinical, teaching, managerial, and research capabilities after training, 19.2% had moved to nonemergency departments. The study concludes that while the existing training framework is structurally sound, several areas require attention: online training formats need optimization, the quality of clinical teaching should be enhanced, and greater emphasis should be placed on scientific research training. Continuous professional development also remains essential. A key limitation of this study is its reliance on convenience sampling and self-reported data without instrument validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: