4.2 Article

Globalization: Migrant nurses' acculturation and their healthcare encounters as consumers of healthcare

期刊

NURSING INQUIRY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nin.12607

关键词

acculturation; foreign nurses; globalization; healthcare experiences; migrants; workforce diversity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study fills the research gap regarding the healthcare experiences of migrant nurses as consumers or recipients of healthcare. The findings suggest that the association between acculturation and perception of healthcare encounters for migrant nurses is mediated by barriers to healthcare access.
Globally, one of every eight nurses is a migrant, but few studies have focused on the healthcare experiences of migrant nurses (MNs) as consumers or recipients of healthcare. We address this gap by examining MNs and their acculturation, barriers to healthcare access, and perceptions of healthcare encounters as consumers. For this mixed-methods study, a convenience sample of MNs working in Europe and Israel was recruited. The quantitative component's methods included testing the reliability of scales contained within the questionnaire and using Hayes Process Model #4 to test for mediation. The qualitative component's methods included analyzing interviews with iterative inductive thematic analysis. Quantitative findings on MNs (n = 73) indicated that the association between acculturation and perception of the healthcare encounter, which MNs experienced as healthcare consumers, was mediated by barriers to healthcare access, even after adjusting for age and gender (p = 0.03). Qualitative interviews with MNs (n = 13) provided possible explanations for the quantitative findings. Even after working in the host country's healthcare system for several years, MNs reported difficulties with their healthcare encounters as healthcare consumers, not only due to their limited knowledge about the culture and healthcare resources but also due to the biased responses they received.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据