罗蔓, 金珊, 何淑通. 基于德尔菲法和层次分析法的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系构建[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2024, 42(5): 628-632, 654. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.013
引用本文: 罗蔓, 金珊, 何淑通. 基于德尔菲法和层次分析法的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系构建[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2024, 42(5): 628-632, 654. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.013
LUO Man, JIN Shan, HE Shutong. Construction of a competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians based on Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2024, 42(5): 628-632, 654. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.013
Citation: LUO Man, JIN Shan, HE Shutong. Construction of a competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians based on Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2024, 42(5): 628-632, 654. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.013

基于德尔菲法和层次分析法的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系构建

Construction of a competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians based on Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process

  • 摘要:
    目的 构建科学合理的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系,为院前急救医师培养、管理提供参考。
    方法 在文献研究的基础上,初步拟定院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系,运用德尔菲法对20名专家进行两轮咨询确定指标体系。采用层次分析法构建指标模型,计算各级指标权重。
    结果 两轮专家问卷回收率均为100%,专家权威系数为0.893,第二轮一、二级指标的专家协调系数分别为0.371、0.326(均P < 0.05)。最终形成的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标包含6个一级指标、49个二级指标。6个一级指标(权重)分别为急救操作技能(0.341 8)、院前医疗急救服务(0.271 1)、医学知识和终身学习(0.141 2)、人际沟通与团队合作(0.112 0)、职业素养(0.088 8)、信息与管理能力(0.045 1)。二级指标组合权重排名前4的皆为急救操作技术,权重最高的是心肺复苏术(0.082 1)。
    结论 基于德尔菲法构建的院前急救医师胜任力评价指标体系具有一定的科学性。应根据构建的指标体系及其权重排序,制定有针对性的培训方案,进一步提升院前急救医师的岗位胜任力。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To construct a scientific and reasonable competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians, providing a reference for their training and management.
    Methods Based on literature research, a preliminary competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians was drafted. The Delphi method was used to consult 20 experts in two rounds to finalize the index system. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was employed to construct the index model and calculate the weights of each level of indicators.
    Results The response rate for two rounds of expert questionnaires was 100%, with an expert authority coefficient of 0.893. The expert coordination coefficients for the first and second-level indicators in the second round were 0.371 and 0.326, respectively (both P < 0.05). The final competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians included 6 first-level indicators and 49 second-level indicators. The six first-level indicators (with weights) were: emergency operational skills (0.341 8), pre-hospital medical emergency services (0.271 1), medical knowledge and lifelong learning (0.141 2), interpersonal communication and teamwork (0.112 0), professional ethics (0.088 8), and information and management capabilities (0.045 1). The top four second-level indicators in terms of combined weight were all emergency operational techniques, with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (0.082 1) having the highest weight.
    Conclusions The competency evaluation index system for pre-hospital emergency physicians constructed based on the Delphi method is scientifically sound. Targeted training programs should be developed according to the constructed index system and its weight ranking to further enhance the job competency of pre-hospital emergency physicians.

     

/

返回文章
返回