Research On The Construction Of Evaluating Indicator System With Training Centre Of Nursing Care For Senior Citizens

ObjectivesTo develop strong scientific, objective, systematic and operationalevaluation index system of old-age nursing personnel training bases. To providea reference of old-age care staff training base to relevant departments todevelop auditing standards, and lay the foundation for old-age care stafftraining.MethodsFirst the organizers shall develop an evaluation index system model for theconstruction of the bases, depending on the results of theoretical research andrecommendations of the health sector. The organizers shall design three roundsof expert questionnaire to make an expert survey, using Delphi ExpertConsultation Method, and carry on3rounds inquires by mail to ask the expertsfor advice through the anonymous way. The organizers summarize the views ofexperts on each arrangement, revise them and make reasonable evaluationcriteria for the construction of the bases. Then the organizers shall filter theevaluations provided by the experts and build the judgment matrix using theindicators selected in accordance with the analytic hierarchy process. Theorganizers use Microsoft Excel2003software to calculate the weights ofindicators at all levels and make a test for conformance, and calculate indicatorsat all levels of expert advice using SPSS13.0software package and test thecoefficient and the degree of their agreement to find the significance.ResultsThe recovery rates of the three rounds of consultation questionnaires areas follows,96.67%,92.86%, and100%, respectively. The indicators at all levels mean a minimum of3.5384, and a maximum of4.6923. The standard deviationis less than1with a minimum of0.4523and a maximum of0.7442, and thecoefficient of variation is less than0.200with a minimum of0.1003and amaximum of0.1965. The experts’ authoritative degree is0.9019, above0.7, andtheir authoritative degree is very high, and therefore the result is credible. Theexperts’ coordinated coefficients are as follows, the first round is0.435, thesecond is0.594, and the third round is0.349. After three rounds of consultingexperts for advice, the organizers determine6items for the first-level indicator,22items for the second-level indicator and33items for the third-level indicator,and ultimately determine the index weights.ConclusionsThe experts involved in the3rounds of surveys are representative andauthoritative. They have enthusiasm, and there is a higher degree ofcoordination, so their opinions are centralized. The hierarchical sortingconsistency tests of the evaluation system-level meets logical consistency at alllevels, and therefore all levels of the indicator weights have a scientific andobjective nature.