What question did this study set out to answer?

This study evaluates the effectiveness of a standardized training program for trainee nurses compared to clinical instructors.

June 28, 2026Open Access

Evaluating Standardised Training Effectiveness for Trainee Nurses and Clinical Instructors in a Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital: A Mixed‐Methods Study in Henan, China

Key Points

This study evaluates the effectiveness of a standardized training program for trainee nurses compared to clinical instructors.
Participants included 130 trainee nurses and 80 clinical instructors, with 89 valid responses from nurses.
Trainee nurses completed a questionnaire and 15 were selected for qualitative face-to-face interviews.
The study utilized a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design.
Trainee nurses rated training objectives and clinical instructors as 'very effective', while training content was rated 'effective'.
Significant difference noted between self-evaluations of trainee nurses and evaluations by clinical instructors (p < 0.05).
Qualitative data revealed issues like overconfidence among trainees and heavy workloads affecting instructors' ratings.

Abstract

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a standardised training programme and compare the competency ratings between trainee nurses and clinical instructors in a national Third-Level Grade A traditional Chinese medicine hospital in Henan Province, China. DESIGN: This study employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design. METHODS: Two sets of study participants were included: (1) trainee nurses-130 eligible trainee nurses employed in 2018 (who completed a 2-year standardised training programme) were invited to complete an online questionnaire, with 89 valid responses; (2) clinical instructors-80 clinical instructors (trainers in the hospital) were fully enrolled to complete the questionnaire. Additionally, 15 trainee nurses were randomly selected for face-to-face interviews to collect qualitative data. RESULTS: Quantitative data show that trainee nurses and clinical instructors evaluated training objectives, clinical instructors and training schedule as 'very effective'. Trainee nurses' evaluation of training content was 'effective', whereas clinical instructors' evaluation of training content was 'very effective'. The self-evaluation of trainee nurses and trainee nurses' performance as rated by clinical instructors on clinical practice, nursing procedure, specialised nursing, health teaching and case study were all within the 'master level'. Based on the t-test results, there was a significant difference between the self-rating of the trainee nurses and the rated evaluation of the clinical instructors (p < 0.05). Qualitative interview data further explained this discrepancy: trainees' overconfidence may stem from unclear expectation standards and lack of timely feedback, and instructors' lower ratings were influenced by heavy workloads limiting observation time. Additionally, qualitative findings identified systemic issues (e.g., rotation scheduling, ressure in taking the exam) that quantitative data alone could not reveal, and these issues indirectly affect competency alignment. CONCLUSION: Standardised training is an effective way to instruct trainee nurses. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study has no patient or public contribution.

Read Full Paperexternally

问 AI

Bookmark

View Full Paper