Nienke Elske Dijkstra

Background: Despite trends towards greater professionalisation of the nursing profession and an improved public image in certain countries, studies also show that large proportions of the public still do not fully appreciate nurses’ competencies. Mapping differences in the societal and professional recognition of nurses allows for benchmarking among countries. Aim: To investigate the level of societal recognition of the nursing profession in nine European countries, and the level of professional recognition perceived by European nurses themselves; to compare levels of recognition between countries; and to identify influencing factors. Methods: A cross‐sectional study was conducted. Through an online survey, the study surveyed both the general public and nurses from various healthcare settings across nine countries between December 2022 and June 2023. The instrument used was a combination of self‐developed questions on societal and professional recognition, the Work Motivation Scale and an adapted version of the Multidimensional Work Motivation Scale. Data were analysed using SPSS v.29.0, with socioeconomic prestige scores for the public and work environment/work motivation scores for nurses calculated accordingly. Results: A total of 1618 adult citizens and 2335 nurses participated. The public predominantly characterised nurses with attributes such as friendliness, warmth, empathy and compassion. The mean socioeconomic prestige score assigned to nurses was 7.2/10 (SD 1.9), with Portugal having the highest score ( M 7.5/10, SD 2.0) and Norway the lowest ( M 5.8/10, SD 1.4; p < 0.001). Professional recognition experienced by nurses was generally low (54% indicated rather low, 17% very low). Slovenia, the Netherlands and Belgium had slightly higher mean scores (all M 1.4/3) compared to other countries ( p < 0.001). High professional recognition could be predicted for 33% by work environment score (OR = 1.21; 95% CI [1.19–1.24]), work motivation score (OR = 1.02; 95%CI[1.01–1.02]), expertise outside the hospital (OR = 1.57; 95% CI [1.25–1.97]) and work experience (OR = 1.01; 95% CI [1.00–1.02]) corrected for country. Conclusion: The study highlights the need for targeted interventions to improve the professional and public image of the nursing profession while addressing disparities in professional recognition between countries. Longitudinal studies are recommended to monitor changes in public perception and professional recognition among nurses.

Nurses play an important role in interprofessional pharmaceutical care. Curricula related to pharmaceutical care, however, vary a lot. Mapping the presence of pharmaceutical care related domains and competences in nurse educational programs can lead to a better understanding of the extent to which curricula fit expectations of the labour market. The aim of this study was to describe 1) the presence of pharmaceutical care oriented content in nursing curricula at different educational levels and 2) nursing students’ perceived readiness to provide nurse pharmaceutical care in practice. A quantitative cross-sectional survey design was used. Nursing schools in 14 European countries offering educational programs for levels 4–7 students were approached between January and April 2021. Through an online survey final year students had to indicate to what extent pharmaceutical care topics were present in their curriculum. A total of 1807 students participated, of whom 8% had level 4–5, 80% level 6, 12% level 7. Up to 84% of the students indicated that pharmaceutical care content was insufficiently addressed in their curriculum. On average 14% [range 0–30] felt sufficiently prepared to achieve the required pharmaceutical care competences in practice. In level 5 curricula more pharmaceutical care domains were absent compared with other levels. Although several pharmaceutical care related courses are present in current curricula of level 4–7 nurses, its embedding should be extended. Too many students perceive an insufficient preparation to achieve pharmaceutical care competences required in practice. Existing gaps in pharmaceutical care should be addressed to offer more thoroughly prepared nurses to the labour market.

Object. To explore nurses’ experiences and perceptions of implementing pharmaceutical technical assistants on hospital wards for medication dispensation. The study focuses on implementation, role development, and impact on safety and quality of care, identifying critical success factors and improvement opportunities. Methods. In a qualitative descriptive study, between December 2022 and March 2023, 16 semistructured interviews were carried out with a stratified purposive sample of nurses across internal, surgical, and geriatric wards. The inclusion criteria required a minimum of six months of work experience and experience working both day and night shifts. Inductive thematic analysis was performed in NVivo 1.6.1. Results. Semistructured interviews revealed three main themes: (1) patient safety and quality of care, (2) organization of care, and (3) role development and collaboration. The implementation of pharmaceutical technical assistants on nursing wards was perceived to reduce the risk of medication errors without compromising care quality, allowing nurses to spend more time on direct patient care. Clear communication procedures were vital for successful implementation, highlighting the need for collaboration and information exchange between pharmaceutical technical assistants and nurses. Continuity in assigning pharmaceutical technical assistants was highlighted as crucial to improve medication safety and quality of care. This is considered an important aspect to ensure a smooth and optimal cooperation between nurses and pharmaceutical technical assistants. Nurses expressed that working with pharmaceutical technical assistants challenged their supervisory role and teamwork dynamics. Conclusions. Nurses confirmed the added value of pharmaceutical technical assistants in medication management. Critical factors included dedicated assignments to hospital wards, clear roles, and mutual expectations in collaboration with ward nurses.

Purpose: To describe nurses’ support interventions for medication adherence, and patients’ experiences and desired improvements with this care. Patients and Methods: A two-phase study was performed, including an analysis of questionnaire data and conducted interviews with members of the care panel of the Netherlands Patients Federation. The questionnaire assessed 14 types of interventions, satisfaction (score 0– 10) with received interventions, needs, experiences, and desired improvements in nurses’ support. Interviews further explored experiences and improvements. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and a thematic analysis approach. Results: Fifty-nine participants completed the questionnaire, and 14 of the 59 participants were interviewed. The satisfaction score for interventions was 7.9 (IQR 7– 9). The most common interventions were: “noticing when I don’t take medication as prescribed” (n = 35), “helping me to find solutions to overcome problems with using medications” (n = 32), “helping me with taking medication” (n = 32), and “explaining the importance of taking medication at the right moment” (n = 32). Fifteen participants missed ≥ 1 of the 14 interventions. Most mentioned the following: “regularly asking about potential problems with medication use” (33%), “regularly discussing whether using medication is going well” (29%), and “explaining the importance of taking medication at the right moment” (27%). Twenty-two participants experienced the following as positive: improved self-management of adequate medication taking, a professional patient–nurse relationship to discuss adherence problems, and nurses’ proactive attitude to arrange practical support for medication use. Thirteen patients experienced the following as negative: insufficient timing of home visits, rushed appearance of nurses, and insufficient expertise about side effects and taking medication. Suggested improvements included performing home visits on time, more time for providing support in medication use, and more expertise about side effects and administering medication. Conclusion: Overall, participants were satisfied, and few participants wanted more interventions. Nurses’ support improved participants’ self-management of medication taking and enabled patients to discuss their adherence problems. Adequately timed home visits, more time for support, and accurate medication-related knowledge are desired.