In this project, the nursing shortage problem is to be addressed through educational reforms and better pay for nurses. It is believed that higher salaries would make the profession more attractive, while the extensive financing of education will attract experienced professionals who will enhance the quality of training. On a related note, the proposed solution will raise the quality of the personnel coming out of nursing schools. The quality of education should improve, as well as the average salary for nursing personnel. Such changes would positively influence the perception of the health care industry. The timeline for the implementation of the proposed changes is three years, to give the newly educated and re-educated personnel time to gain the necessary experience needed to replace the person who should leave the industry within the next five years.
To evaluate the effectiveness of this solution, a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods would be used to attain the most informative results of the assessment. The qualitative method will be used to gain insight into and understanding of the underlying opinions of nursing staff, educators, and prospective nurses, whereas the quantitative method is intended to supply numerical data that will be converted into usable statistics (Windsor, 2015). The qualitative method, in the form of semi-structured surveys and interviews, will provide answers as to whether the preoperative curriculum developed by experienced nurse educators better prepares students for OR roles. The proposed change would be considered effective if the survey and interviews provide proof that students have the necessary skills useful in OR contexts. The quantitative method, in the form of questionnaires and systematic observations, is intended to enable assessing the effectiveness of the solution regarding nurse turnover and job satisfaction both before and after the intervention. It will also reflect a change in the rate of medical errors,
and so on (Developing an effective evaluation plan, 2011). The change would be considered effective if the incidence of medical mistakes caused by overload and stress should be reduced to a considerable extent. Also, lower turnover should be a consequence of the effective implementation of the program. The combination of the two methods would enable assessing the degree to which project objectives would be achieved, and provide in-depth insights into the performance indicators (Stufflebeam & Coryn, 2014). The chosen methods will enable evaluating the process and the impact of the changes, as well as the outcome of the implementation.
Several variables should be taken into consideration when evaluating the program outcomes, such as staff experiences and attitudes, the rate of nurse turnover, skills and satisfaction of students who obtained the training, and cost-effectiveness of the changes.
It is crucial to assess how the improved quality of education and the increased compensation payable to the nursing personnel will have translated into a positive perception of the profession and the quantity of trainees. Apart from that, it is important to find out whether the improved stability of the system will have resulted in lower nurse turnover, due to increase in graduates entering into practice. According to the program, the turnover issue would be decreased, due to the new and better-trained nursing staff. However, it is crucial to take into consideration the length of the training program, and assess the effectiveness of the transition of nurses from nursing schools into the health care system. The quality of nursing care should be assessed when turnover decreases, as well as evaluating the quantity and quality of the medical errors in a medical facility.
The positive experiences and general satisfaction of the current nursing staff will imply an adequate salary range and the possibility of self-actualization in the profession, as well as opportunity for career growth. In terms of the staff perception variable, increased remuneration is believed to attract professional nurses to venture into academia, and provide qualified nurse education. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of the projects is one of the main variables in the justification of efficiency (Silverman & Patterson, 2014). The problem of efficiency of capital investments is mainly defined by the extent to which future changes would justify the current costs. Efficiency is generally determined by the likelihood of beneficial effect, compared to the total cost of obtaining this result.
When assessing any intervention, it is crucial to determine whether the project will work as it was planned, and improve upon program submission if necessary. Additionally, positive assessment provides the basis for continuing endorsement of the program. The methods of evaluation enable insight into the effectiveness of the change and determine the capability to address the target group of the program. Moreover, they highlight any potential or existing issues in the implementation. The aim of the appraisal is to define whether the objectives and aims of the program have been reached, and to what extent.
Effective dissemination is important to ensure that the results of the project were well adapted to the target audience. Regarding the current project, the results would be properly presented and sent to all the parties involved in the project before being made available to the public, or distributed. The results of the project would be noted in other research projects, when suitable. The participants who took part in surveys, questionnaires, and other activities related to the project would be notified duly about the results and the immixture that came from the project outcome.
Outlets for the dissemination and use of the project outcomes would be implemented through specific strategy. They would involve three main means of propagation: the Internet, scholarly publications, and networks. They will address the three target groups: the academic community, policy makers, and the greater nursing community (Tabak, Khoong, Chambers & Brownson, 2012). The dissemination tools would include reports that deliver the research findings, peer review articles in scholarly journals, and policy briefs. The dissemination strategy implies communication between the stakeholders and researchers, as well as a dialogue with the audience aimed at receiving feedback (Tabak, Khoong, Chambers & Brownson, 2012). The main goal of open dialogue is to gain insight into how to improve or revise the proposed project. Various booklets and printouts would be provided with a goal of reaching every category of the audience.
After the evaluation of the project has been made, it is crucial to provide feedback to the stakeholders engaged in the intervention. Dissemination of the evidence will help garner follow-up support of the project, in case it is successful. Publicity from disseminated information may also increase the influence and significance of the changes. On the other hand, if the program was not effective, it would be necessary to get this information to the public, so that the following issues would not be addressed in other, similar projects.
Windsor, R. (2015). Evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention programs: Improving population health through evidence-based practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Coryn, C. L. S. (2014). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Silverman, R. M., & Patterson, K. L. (2014). Qualitative research methods for community development. London, UK: Routledge.
Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Bridging research and practice. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 337-350.