4.2 Article

Paramedic student adherence to the National Standard Curriculum recommendations

期刊

PREHOSPITAL EMERGENCY CARE
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 448-452

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10903120701536701

关键词

paramedic; curriculum; education; internship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. The National Standard Curriculum-Paramedic (NSC-P) is the accepted curriculum for paramedic programs across the country. The purpose of this study was to examine the completion of the NSC-P clinical internship recommendations by paramedic students. Methods. Paramedic student internship experience data from 2001 to 2005 was retrospectively reviewed from FISDAP (TM). Student records that met the following inclusion criteria were analyzed: 1) student provided consent for research, 2) data verified by a preceptor, and 3) student successfully graduated from their paramedic program. The data were descriptively evaluated to determine the number of students who completed 100% of the NSC-P recommendations, to determine what percentage of students were completing each category, and to determine the average number of tasks completed by students for each recommendation. Results. Of the 1,817 student records that met the inclusion criteria, 140 (7.7%) completed 100% of the NSC-P recommended goals in each category. Students met or exceeded the recommended number of tasks most often for 15 medication administrations (92%), 25 successful IV accesses (88%), 30 geriatric assessments (63.7%), 5 live endotracheal intubations (63.5%), and 50 adult assessments (63.2%). A majority of PS are completing less than 50% of the NCS-P recommendations for 20 ventilations on an un-intubated patient, 20 psychiatric patient assessments, 8 pediatric respiratory distress assessments, and 10 obstetric patient assessments. Conclusion. A vast majority of paramedic students are not completing all of the NSC-P recommendations. The reasons for this shortcoming are likely multifaceted and require further research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据