Construction Of Disaster Nursing Specialist Training Courses Core Knowledge System

[Objective] The purpose of the research is to initially establish the disaster specialized nursing training system, and to provide theoretical and research support for the establishment of the system. The research was conducted from the perspective of nurses, managers and doctors who have previously participated in the disaster rescue activities, in order to help researchers familiarize with the contents of disaster nursing training program. Meanwhile, the outcome of the study is also a theoretical basis, based on which certain disaster nursing training institutions can develop their cultivating programs. Hence, this study is significantly important for the improvement of the specialized disaster nurses as well as the training program.[Methodology] Based on literature review, expert interview, and the analysis of current domestic and overseas disaster nursing training situation, the researcher constructed an initial structure of the training system consisting of theory education, skill training and drilling plan. Delphi expert consultation method was adopted for two-round interviews on40experts. As a result, the curriculums of disaster nursing cultivating system was finally determined.[Conclusion] First, this study determined the core knowledge of the disaster nursing training system based on theory education, skill training and drilling plan practice. Three first class indicators, thirteen second class indicators and forty four third class indicators were included. The experts’opinions on the indicator importance showed a central tendency. The coefficient of variation diminished and hence the coordinate coefficient increased. The above indicted that the experts reached an agreement on the indicators and the screening process was reasonable. Second, experts were wisely chosen and the survey results were reliable and dependable. The qualitative analysis of the specialists’basic background and quantitative analysis of their authority coefficient (overall authority coefficient is0.886) suggested that the chosen experts were representatives presenting good variability and authority. Besides, the response rate of100%to the survey demonstrated a commendable initiative. In addition, the overall expert coefficients were0.221and0.386respectively and both P values were less than0.01, which illustrated a high agreement. In conclusion, the expert forecast was based on theoretical analysis and practical experience and therefore rather reliable.