From leadership research to district action: Development of an educational intervention to enhance critical care nurses’ mentoring competence – a qualitative study

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Background The global shortage of nurses places additional pressure on healthcare systems and nursing education. Effective mentoring is crucial for students, and various interventions have been developed to enhance the mentoring competences of nurses working with undergraduate nursing students. However, research on mentoring competences in the context of post-registration critical care nursing remains limited. Methods This study aimed to develop an educational intervention to enhance the critical care nurses’ mentoring competence. We employed a qualitative design, guided by the UK Medical Research Council’s framework for complex interventions and the European guideline on clinical nurse mentor’s mentoring competence development. We conducted three focus group interviews with 11 critical care nurses from university and local hospitals in Northern Norway and used reflexive thematic analysis to analyse the data. Results We identified four themes essential for the intervention: mentoring as its own skillset, mentoring as an act of power, mentoring as a collaborative effort, and organisational support for mentoring. Participants emphasised the need for practical tools to address challenges such as diverse student learning needs, fostering reflection, and managing power dynamics. They also highlighted the importance of shared understanding of mentoring practices within the units and robust organisational support, including time allocation for both daily mentoring and competence development, and leadership commitment. Conclusions The findings informed the development of a blended learning educational intervention combining online learning with in-person simulated discussions. The intervention focuses on practical tools, simulations, and fostering a supportive mentoring environment tailored for critical care nursing context. Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-026-05136-3.

Study methods

This study was a part of research program aiming to enhance Norwegian CCNs’ mentoring competences [24]. The overreaching design and methodology were based on the UK Medical Research Council’s guidance on developing and evaluating complex interventions [25]. The intervention development process followed the Guidance on Developing Complex Interventions in Healthcare [26].

Limitations

This study utilised an established and tested model for developing mentoring competence as the foundation for the intervention. The COREQ checklist was used to ensure accurate reporting, along with the UK Medical Research Council’s framework for complex interventions, guiding the intervention development process. Stakeholder participation was employed through a reference group and focus group interviews. Stakeholder involvement could have been more rigorous with the use of a co-design model, which was not considered necessary due to the strong theoretical foundation for the intervention and resource constraints in the participating units. Authors’ competence in critical care nursing and mentoring was considered a strength in the development process but may have introduced researcher bias.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one school improvement question with teachers. Protect a short shared planning cycle, agree an instructional change and use a common rubric for examining student work. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Review implementation fidelity, teacher time and independently scored student work against a recorded baseline. Examine access differences and competing explanations before attributing changes to leadership. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Matias Rasi; Monica Evelyn Kvande; Bente Norbye; Kristina Mikkonen; Tove Aminda Hanssen. Development of an educational intervention to enhance critical care nurses’ mentoring competence – a qualitative study. BMC Nursing (2026-07-30). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-026-05136-3

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.