Background Effective clinical reasoning is a core competency of health professionals that is necessary to assure patients’ safety. Unfortunately, adoption of longitudinal clinical reasoning curricula is still infrequent. This study explores the barriers that hinder the explicit teaching of clinical reasoning from a new international perspective. Methods The context of this study was a European project whose aim is to develop a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum. We collected data in semi-structured interviews with responders from several European countries who represent various health professions and have different backgrounds, roles and experience. We performed a qualitative content analysis of the gathered data and constructed a coding frame using a combined deductive/inductive approach. The identified themes were validated by parallel coding and in group discussions among project members. Results A total of 29 respondents from five European countries participated in the interviews; the majority of them represent medicine and nursing sciences. We grouped the identified barriers into eight general themes: Time, Culture, Motivation, Clinical Reasoning as a Concept, Teaching, Assessment, Infrastructure and Others. Subthemes included issues with discussing errors and providing feedback, awareness of clinical reasoning teaching methods, and tensions between the groups of professionals involved. Conclusions This study provides an in-depth analysis of the barriers that hinder the teaching of explicit clinical reasoning. The opinions are presented from the perspective of several European higher education institutions. The identified barriers are complex and should be treated holistically due to the many interconnections between the identified barriers. Progress in implementation is hampered by the presence of reciprocal causal chains that aggravate this situation. Further research could investigate the perceptual differences between health professions regarding the barriers to clinical reasoning. The collected insights on the complexity and diversity of these barriers will help when rolling out a long-term agenda for overcoming the factors that inhibit the implementation of clinical reasoning curricula.

No abstract

No abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and its related stresses such as short-staffing, heavy workloads, and burnout are prompting nurses to re-consider institutional employment, bringing a renewed interest in self-employed nursing and its regulation. There is limited research on the regulation of self-employed nursing roles, and published work focuses on nurses’ experiences rather than on regulatory practices themselves. This qualitative case study research aimed to examine the regulation of self-employed nurses by comparing the regulatory policies and processes of nursing regulatory bodies in Ontario, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. The findings demonstrated wide variation in the regulation of self-employed nurses across these jurisdictions. The article includes recommendations to clarify and harmonize the processes used to regulate self-employed nurses.

Although it currently receives few complaints regarding its vegetation control work, TransAlta recently launched a customer survey to measure levels of satisfaction with control methods used, the quality of completed work, explanations given for the work, state of property after crews have gone, and crew work habits. All respondents returning negative comments or questions (six percent of 567 responses) were contacted by TransAlta or its contractors. The survey was a very useful tool for identifying customer service areas needing improvement and used its preliminary results to initiate appropriate staff and contractor training programs.