Constructing an evaluation index system for clinical nursing practice teaching quality using a Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process-based approach

Abstract

Abstract Background The key step in evaluating the quality of clinical nursing practice education lies in establishing a scientific, objective, and feasible index system. Current assessments of clinical teaching typically measure hospital learning environments, classroom teaching, teaching competency, or the internship quality of nursing students. As a result, clinical evaluations are often insufficient to provide focused feedback, guide faculty development, or identify specific areas for clinical teachers to implement change and improvement. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to to construct a scientific, systematic, and clinically applicable evaluation index system of clinical nursing practice teaching quality and determine each indicator’s weight to provide references for the scientific and objective evaluation of clinical nursing practice teaching quality. Methods Based on the “Structure-Process-Outcome” theoretical model, a literature review and Delphi surveys were conducted to establish the evaluation index system of clinical nursing practice teaching quality. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was employed to determine the weight of each indicator. Results The effective response rate for the two rounds of expert surveys was 100%. The expert authority coefficients were 0.961 and 0.975, respectively. The coefficient of variation for the indicators at each level ranged from 0 to 0.25 and 0 to 0.21, and the Kendall harmony coefficients were 0.209 and 0.135, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.001). The final established index system included 3 first-level, 10 second-level, and 29 third-level indicators. According to the weights computed by the AHP, first-level indicators were ranked as “Process quality” (39.81%), “Structure quality” (36.67%), and “Outcome quality” (23.52%). Among the secondary indicators, experts paid the most attention to “Teaching staff” (23.68%), “Implementation of teaching rules and regulations (14.14%), and “Teaching plans” (13.20%). The top three third-level indicators were “Level of teaching staff” (12.62%), “Structure of teaching staff” (11.06%), and “Implementation of the management system for teaching objects” (7.54%). Conclusion The constructed evaluation index system of clinical nursing practice teaching quality is scientific and reliable, with reasonable weight. The managers’ focus has shifted from outcome-oriented to process-oriented approaches, and more focus on teaching team construction, teaching regulations implementation, and teaching design is needed to improve clinical teaching quality.