Opiniones de profesores y estudiantes de enfermería respecto al contenido de las tutorías

En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 200 DOCENCIA - INVESTIGACIÓN Opinions o nu sing p o esso s and s uden s ega ding he con en o he men o ing p og am Opiniones de p o eso es y es udian es de en e me ía espec o al con enido de las u o ías *Gue a Ma ín, Ma ía Dolo es **Lima-Se ano, Ma a *Lima-Rod íguez, Joaquín Sal ado *Phd. P o esso Depa men o Nu sing. School o Nu sing, Physio he apy and Podia y. Se illa Uni e si y. E-mail: [email protected] **Phd. Doc o Assis an P o esso Depa men o Nu sing. School o Nu sing, Physio he apy and Podia y. Se illa Uni e si y. Spain. Keywo ds: Nu sing Educa ion; Nu sing eache s; men o ships; Nu sing S uden s. Palab as cla e: Educación en En e me ía; Docen es de En e me ía; Men o ías; Es udian es de En e me ía ABSTRACT Objec i es: To compa e opinions o nu sing p o esso s and s uden s o he Uni e si y o Se ille (Spain) on he hemes add essed in he men o ing p og am, and o iden i y subjec p e e ences o he s uden s. Me hod: P e iously alida ed ques ionnai es we e gi en o 181 p o esso s and 1015 s uden s. A desc ip i e and bi a ia e analysis was conduc ed, suppo ed by SPSS 18.0 (p<0.05), and o he issue o subjec p e e ences o he s uden s, a quali a i e analysis was conduc ed suppo ed by ATLAS. i 6. Resul s: 56.7% emale p o esso s, mean age 46.8 yea s. 77.3% emale s uden s, mean age 21.4 yea s. O hem, 93.4% o he p o esso s and 63.2% o he s uden s a i med add essing academic issues and 62.4% and 36%, espec i ely, add essed any subjec (p<0.05), di e ences we e obse ed in a ou o he p o esso s wi h aining in men o ing (p<0.05). Those wi h a highe academic deg ee and who each ull ime add essed mo e academic and uni e si y issues while hose wi h a lowe academic deg ee and eaching pa ime add essed he heal h ca e subjec s (p<0.05). The e we e 868 commen s on subjec p e e ences o he s uden s, highligh ing he academic subjec s (62.4%) and he p o essionaliza ion subjec s (18.2%). Conclusion: The sociodemog aphic cha ac e is ics and he p o esso s’ p io aining in men o ing in luence he subjec ma e add essed in he men o ing p og am. I is impo an o make he opinions o hese collec i es known and o p omo e he aining o he p o esso s on his opic. En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 201 RESUMEN Obje i os: Compa a opiniones de p o eso es y es udian es de en e me ía de la Uni e sidad de Se illa (España) sob e las cues iones abo dadas en las u o ías, e iden i ica p e e encias emá icas de los es udian es. Mé odo: Se aplica on cues iona ios p e iamen e alidados a 181 p o eso es y 1015 es udian es. Se ealizó análisis desc ip i o y bi a ian e apoyado en SPSS 18.0 (p<0,05) y pa a la p egun a sob e p e e encias emá icas de los es udian es, se ealizó un análisis cuali a i o apoyado en ATLAS. i 6. Resul ados: 56,7% p o eso as, edad media 46,8 años. 77,3% alumnas, edad media 21,4 años. 93,4% p o eso es y 63,2% de es udian es a i ma on abo da cues iones académicas, y 62,4% y 36%, espec i amen e, sob e cualquie ema (p<0,05). Se obse a on di e encias a o ables a los p o eso es con o mación en u o ías (p<0,05). Los de mayo g ado académico y iempo comple o abo da on más cues iones académicas y uni e si a ias mien as que los de meno g ado académico y iempo pa cial las asis enciales (p<0,05). Hubo 868 comen a ios sob e p e e encias emá icas de los es udian es, sub ayando los emas académicos (62,4%) y los p o esionalizan es (18,2%). Conclusión: Las ca ac e ís icas sociodemog á icas y la o mación p e ia sob e u o ías del p o eso ado in luyen en el abo daje emá ico en la u o ía. Es impo an e da a conoce las opiniones de es os colec i os y omen a la o mación del p o eso ado en es e ópico. INTRODUCTION In he uni e si y con ex , one o he main unc ions o he p o esso s is o ien ed owa ds men o ing which has o be adap ed o new oles, concep ions and s a egies o he eaching/lea ning p ocess cen ed on he s uden s, and he p o esso as men o has he unc ion o guiding, o ien ing and acili a ing his p ocess(1,2). Men o ing can be de ined as “an o ien ing p ocess, ca ied ou join ly by he p o esso and he s uden , on academic, p o essional and pe sonal aspec s, wi h he aim o es ablishing a wo k p og am ha a ou s he p epa a ion and design o he mos app op ia e pa h o he chosen uni e si y deg ee” (3). Di e en au ho s ha e ocussed hei s udies on he o ien a ion ha men o ing p og ams should ha e, sugges ing ha hey should be di ec ed owa ds academic, p o essional and pe sonal aspec s(4-6). O he s om a b oade iew conside ha hey should be di ec ed o in eg al -in ellec ual, p o essional and human- and social de elopmen o he uni e si y s uden s(7,8). In he li e a u e di e en empi ical s udies a e ound aimed a in es iga ing he di e en aspec s ha a e usually add essed in he men o ing p og ams. Among hem we ind hose ca ied ou in he Uni e si y o Vigo (Spain)(9), in he Complu ense Uni e si y o Mad id (Spain)(10), in he Uni e si y o Co doba (Spain)(11), and in a Uni e si y School o An we p (Belgium)(12), which a e ocussed on add essing academic subjec s. In o he esea ch, such as ha ca ied ou in he Uni e si y o San iago de Compos ela (Spain)(13) and in he Uni e si y o Sal o d (Uni ed Kingdom)(14), he app oach was b oade , ocussing on academic subjec s as well as p o essional and pe sonal subjec s. The objec i es o his pape is o compa e he opinions o nu sing p o esso s and s uden s o he Uni e si y o Se ille (Spain) on he issues add essed in he men o ing p og am, and o iden i y he subjec p e e ences o he s uden s. En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 202 METHODS The design o he esea ch was desc ip i e, c oss-sec ional and co ela ional. The popula ion s udied we e nu sing p o esso s and s uden s om he School o Nu sing, Physio he apy and Podia y o he Uni e si y o Se ille, and o he Nu sing cen es: Red C oss, San Juan de Dios and F ancisco Maldonado, du ing he 2011/2012 school yea . The popula ion o s udy included 238 p o esso s and 1299 s uden s. In o de o calcula e he sample size, he MAS II p og am was used. Fo an e o p obabili y o p<0.05, a s anda dised dis ance (Z)=1.96, an e o in accu acy o 0.05, and a popula ion a iance o 0.5 o ini e popula ions, i was es ima ed ha he sample had o be 183 p o esso s and 484 s uden s. Gi en he high numbe o es ima ed pa icipan s, i was decided o include he en i e popula ion, inally being comp ised o 181 p o esso s (76.1%) and 1015 s uden s (78.1%). Fo he collec ion o da a, wo ad hoc ques ionnai es we e designed, one o p o esso s and ano he o s uden s. These we e alida ed by means o a panel o expe s(15-17). Subsequen ly, a pilo s udy was conduc ed(15,18). In he inal ques ionnai e o p o esso s, he ollowing sociodemog aphic aspec s we e collec ed: sex, age, eaching expe ience (conside ing p o esso s wi h mo e han en yea s as expe s, hose eaching be ween 5 and 10 yea s as consolida ed and hose wi h less han 5 yea s eaching expe ience as beginne s), quali ica ions, academic deg ee, eaching cen e, dedica ion ( ull, pa o pa ime wi h heal h ca e dedica ion in he Heal h Ins i u ions whe e he s uden ca ied ou he clinical p ac ice); cou se whe e he men o ing was ca ied ou , and aining p io o he men o ing. In he inal e sion o he s uden ques ionnai e, he ollowing sociodemog aphic aspec s we e compiled: sex, age, eaching cen e and cou se in which hey we e en olled. Wi h espec o he issues add essed in he men o ing p og ams, six ques ions o p o esso s and s uden s we e included on (a) academic issues ela ed o he cou ses, (b) pe sonal issues, (c) p o essionaliza ion, ha is, ela ed o employmen o hei p o essional u u e, (d) ca e p ac ices, (e) uni e si y o ganisa ion, and ( ) any subjec o consul a ion a he eques o he s uden s, ha is, wi hou any p e-se consul a ion pa e n. Fo each o hese issues, he esponse op ions we e: (a) I don’ know, (b) ne e , (c) almos ne e , (d) some imes, (e) almos always, o ( ) always. The s uden s we e also asked an open ques ion abou hei subjec p e e ences o be add essed in he men o ing p og am. The collec ion o da a om he p o esso s was done by e-mail and om he s uden s in he class oom. The s udy was app o ed by he E hics Commi ee on Resea ch o he Uni e si y o Se ille. Pa icipa ion was olun a y and anonymous, p e iously eques ing in o med consen . The s a is ical package SPSS e sion 18.0 was used o he quan i a i e analysis, which was desc ip i e and bi a ia e, his la e o e i y he ela ion be ween he p o esso and s uden , as well as be ween he sociodemog aphic aspec s in he sample o p o esso s and he issues add essed du ing he men o ing p ocess. In o de o s udy he ela ions be ween o dinal a iables, Spea man’s Rho co ela ion coe icien ( s), he Mann-Whi ney U es and he K uskal-Wallis es we e calcula ed o a p<0.05. To de e mine he size o he e ec (coe icien o con ingency o “C”, Phi o “φ”, Pea son’s “ ”, and Spea man’s “ s”), he alue =0.1 was aken as low, =0.3 as medium and =0.5 as high alue (19-21). En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 203 Fo he ques ion on he subjec p e e ences o he s uden s, he A las. i e sion 6 compu e p og am was used, conduc ing a quali a i e and ca ego ical analysis o he ex ual da a. Fo g ea e igo and eliabili y o he analysis, his was done join ly by h ee e alua o s, in h ee phases: Reduc ion o he in o ma ion; a ailabili y o i s p esen a ion; and ob aining esul s and e i ica ion o conclusions(22). Six esponse ca ego ies we e c ea ed: Academic (o he cou ses), pe sonal (p oblems o he s uden s), p o essionaliza ion (p o essional u u e and employmen ma ke ), ca e p ac ice (clinical p ac ice o p ac icum), uni e si y o ganisa ion (se ices and s uc u e o he Uni e si y o Se ille) and a he eques o he s uden (any subjec eques ed). RESULTS Sociodemog aphic aspec s and p io aining in men o ing o he p o esso s O he 181 pa icipan s, 122 (67.4%) belonged o he School o Nu sing, Physio he apy and Podia y and he es o o he eaching cen es. O he o al, 56.7% (102) we e women. The mean age was 46.8 (s anda d de ia ion: 8.21); 154 (85.1%) we e nu ses, o which 101 (55.8%) had an addi ional deg ee: 19 (10.5%) we e g adua es, 66 (36.5%) held mas e ’s deg ees o diplomas in ad anced s udies [DEA], and 16 (8.8%) we e doc o s. Among he p o esso s who we e no nu ses, 26 we e doc o s and one was a uni e si y g adua e. Wi h espec o eaching expe ience, 75 (41.9%) we e expe s, 60 (33.5%) consolida ed and 44 (24.6%) beginne s. As o dedica ion, 62.4% (113) augh pa ime. Finally, 48 (26.7%) a i med no ha ing p io aining in men o ing. Sociodemog aphic aspec s o he s uden s O he 1015 s uden s, among hose en olled in unde g adua e s udies, 360 (35.5%) we e in he i s yea , 325 (32.0%) in he second, 314 (30.9%) in he hi d. Six een (1.6%) we e s udying o a mas e ’s deg ee. On he o he hand, 590 (58.1%) s uden s we e en olled in he School o Nu sing, Physio he apy and Podia y and he es in o he eaching cen es. Women made up 77.3% (785) o he o al, wi h he mean age being 21.4 yea s (s anda d de ia ion: 4.57). Cha ac e is ics o he men o ing p og am acco ding o he pe spec i es o p o esso s and s uden s F om bo h he iewpoin o he p o esso s 169 (93.4%), and o he s uden s, 641 (63%), he mos add essed issues we e he academic, ollowed by any o he subjec acco ding o 113 (62.4%) o p o esso s and 365 (36%) o s uden s (Table 1). Table 1: Issues add essed by he p o esso s and s uden s in he men o ing p og ams. P o esso s S uden s Issues add essed Ne e o almos ne e N(%) Some- imes N(%) Always o almos always N(%) To al* Ne e o almos ne e N(%) Some - imes N(%) Alway s o almos alway s N(%) To al* Academic 1 (0.6) 4 (2.2) 169 (93.4) 174 (96.2) 120 (11.8) 92 (9.1) 641 (63.2) 853 (84.0) En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 204 Pe sonal 45 (24.9) 67 (37.0) 59 (32.6) 171 (94.5) 624 (61.5) 114 (11.2) 52 (5.1) 790 (77.8) P o essional i-za ion 44 (24.3) 64 (35.4) 64 (35.4) 172 (95.0) 455 (44.8) 231 (22.8) 120 (11.8) 806 (79.4) Ca e p ac ice 55 (30.4) 33 (18.2) 84 (46.4) 172 (95.0) 305 (30.0) 290 (28.6) 205 (20.2) 800 (78.8) Uni e si y o ganisa ion 76 (46.4) 50 (27.6) 42 (23.2) 168 (92.8) 513 (50.5) 186 (18.3) 81 (8.0) 780 (76.8) Any subjec 16 (8.8) 44 (24.3) 113 (62.4) 173 (95.6) 168 (16.6) 168 (16.6) 365 (36.0) 701 (69.1) * F om he o al, he equencies and pe cen ages e e ing o he los da a we e sub ac ed (DK/NA). Compa ison o he opinions o p o esso s and s uden s S a is ically signi ican di e ences in a ou o he g oup o p o esso s ha a i med add essing mo e equen ly he se o he examined issues (Table 2). Table 2: Issues examined in he men o ing p og am by p o esso s and s uden s. Issues G oup N A e age ange Mann- Whi ney U es Asymp. Sig. Z Academic P o esso s 177 633.26 53460.00 0.000 -6.28 0.20 S uden s 853 489.67 Pe sonal subjec s P o esso s 171 740.79 25001.50 0.000 -13.98 0.45 S uden s 801 432.21 P o essionali- za ion P o esso s 172 653.26 43730.00 0.000 -8.09 0.26 S uden s 820 463.83 Ca e p ac ice P o esso s 172 574.78 57055.00 0.000 -4.06 0.13 S uden s 820 480.08 Uni e si y o ganisa ion P o esso s 168 593.02 45608.50 0.000 -6.45 0.21 S uden s 780 448.97 Any subjec P o esso s 173 514.62 47295.00 0.000 -4.62 0.16 S uden s 701 418.47 Rela ions be ween he sociodemog aphic aspec s o he p o esso s and he issues add essed in he men o ing p og ams S a is ically signi ican di e ences we e ound wi h he academic deg ee. The p o esso s wi h highe academic deg ee s a ed hey add essed mo e equen ly hese issues: academic ( s[179]=0.23, p=0.002) and uni e si y o ganisa ion ( s[176]=0.15, p=0.017), while hose wi h lowe academic deg ees a i med highe equency o add essing ca e p ac ices ( s[179]=-0.15, p=0.043). Acco ding o quali ica ions, ha is, being a nu se o ha ing o he deg ees, a s a is ically signi ican di e ence was ound in a ou o p o esso s wi h o he deg ees ha s a ed in g ea e measu e add essing academic issues o any o he subjec . The En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 205 p o esso s ha had ecei ed aining on men o ing s a ed o a g ea e ex en ha hey add essed academic issues and p o essionaliza ion ma e s (Table 3). Table 3: Issues add essed acco ding o quali ica ions and p io aining o he p o esso s Quali ica ion o nu se o o he deg ees Issues Quali ica ion N A e age ange Mann- Whi ney U es Asymp o ic Sig. Z Academic Nu se 153 86.05 1384.50 0.003 -2.92 0.22 O he 26 113.25 Any subjec Nu se 153 86.08 1390.00 0.010 -2.57 0.20 O he 26 113.04 P io aining on men o ing Academic Yes 48 106.53 2350.50 0.002 -3.1 0.23 No 131 83.94 P o essionaliza ion Yes 47 104.73 2362.50 0.015 -2.4 0.18 No 131 84.03 Rela ionships we e ound be ween he eaching expe ience and he issues add essed in he men o ing. The consolida ed p o esso s s a ed add essing p o essionaliza ion issues, such as hose ela ed o ca e p ac ices a a highe le el han, a leas , he beginning p o esso s. As o he dedica ion o he p o esso s, he ull- ime p o esso s s a ed add essing academic issues a a highe le el han, a leas , he p o esso s wi h heal h ca e wo k who augh pa ime. Howe e , hese p o esso s s a ed add essing subjec s ela ed wi h he ca e p ac ice o a a highe le el han, a leas , he pa - ime p o esso s wi hou heal h ca e wo k. Finally, as ega ds he cou ses in which he men o ing was ca ied ou , i was ound ha he p o esso s ha men o ed in he Mas e ’s deg ee add essed p o essionaliza ion issues and hose ela ed wi h ca e p ac ices a a highe le el han, a leas , he p o esso s ha men o ed in he i s cou se (Table 4). Table 4: Issues add essed acco ding o eaching expe ience, dedica ion and cou ses Teaching expe ience o he p o esso s Issues add essed N A e age ange K uskal- Wallis gl P P o essionaliza ion Beginne s 43 71.59 7.41 2 0.025 0.14 Consolida ed 59 98.05 Expe s 74 90.71 Ca e p ac ice Beginne s 43 70.83 8.05 2 0.018 0.15 Consolida ed 59 98.64 Expe s 75 91.83 Dedica ion o he p o esso s Academic Full ime 67 104.45 18.08 2 0.000 0.22 Pa ime 72 89.23 Pa ime CIS 40 67.19 Ca e p ac ice Full ime 67 92.08 14.70 2 0.001 0.20 Pa ime 72 75.13 Pa ime CIS 40 113.28 En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 206 Cou ses whe e he p o esso s men o ed P o essionaliza ion Fi s 32 72.67 10.83 4 0.029 0.12 Second 39 87.12 Thi d 28 90.91 Mas e ’s 20 119.18 Ca e p ac ice Fi s 32 52.98 21.72 4 0.000 0.17 Second 39 98.77 Thi d 28 89.86 Mas e ’s 20 103.10 Subjec p e e ences o be add essed in he men o ing p og ams acco ding o he s uden s In his sec ion, 705 s uden s (69.3%) answe ed and 156 (22.2%) made mo e han one commen ha co esponded wi h di e en ca ego ies. The e we e a o al o 868 commen s o all he cou ses, which we e included in he di e en ca ego ies (Table 5). Table 5: Subjec p e e ences o he s uden s by cou ses Ca ego y 1s cou se N(%) 2nd cou se N(%) 3 d cou se N(%) Mas e ’s Deg ee N(%) Academic 207(69.5) 169(68.7) 161(50.9) 5(62.5) Pe sonal 18(6.0) 7(2.8) 10(3.2) 0(0.0) P o essionaliza ion 43(14.4) 40(16.3) 73(23.1) 2(25.0) Ca e p ac ice 7(2.4) 8(3.2) 18(5.7) 0(0.0) Uni e si y o ganisa ion 11(3.7) 11(4.5) 10(3.2) 0(0.0) A s uden ’s eques 12(4.0) 11(4.5) 44(13.9) 1(12.5) To al 298(100) 246(100) 316(100) 8(100) Thus, wi h espec o he academic subjec s, basically commen s we e made on he need o cla i y doub s in he men o ing, such as: “Be o e any hing, I would like i o deal wi h he subjec s ha I don’ unde s and o ha a e di icul o me.” (s u. 245). O he commen s e e ed o he exams, no ing he impo ance o his ques ion o he s uden s: “Wha ype o ques ions will be on he exam? Wha a e he mos impo an cases ha we ha e o know? Subjec s o g ea di icul y o he majo i y” (s u. 476). “T icks o s udying so much ma e ial. Types o ques ions on he exam. Highligh wha is impo an ” (s u. 520). Di e en s uden s e e ed o using he men o ing p og am o ge o know he e alua ion and he c i e ia: “Abou he e alua ion c i e ia” (s u. 802). “… he me hodology ha is being ollowed and o he s and gi e al e na i es. I know ha his is e alua ed a he end o he e m...” (s u. 684). Some commen s we e ela ed o he use o he men o ing p og am in pe o ming he wo k equi ed du ing he deg ee o he Mas e ’s p og am: “On he end-o -deg ee p ojec ” (s u. 585). “On he end o mas e ’s deg ee p ojec ” (s u. 721). “Ad ice o he assignmen s ha we a e p epa ing” (s u. 155). Finally, he s uden s highligh ed he guidance on s udying, concen a ion and academic pe o mance echniques: “Guiding on s udying (how o s udy,…). Academic pe o mance (wha should be imp o ed)” (s u. 257). Wi h espec o he pe sonal subjec s, he s uden s made gene al commen s, o example: “… ha we could deal wi h pe sonal issues and ind he bes help possible” (s u. 878). Commen s we e also made ela ed o he eelings and o he psychosocial En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 207 aspec s: “P oblems ha a ise. Doub s. Fea . Mo i a ions. Expec a ions” (s u. 298). “Pe sonal subjec s wi h he aim o elaxing us and making us eel mo e secu e” (s u. 408). “Sel -es eem ha we ha e wi h espec o he deg ee. Pe sonal di icul ies. Ad ice ha s imula e us, ha suppo us (s u. 180). On p o essionaliza ion subjec s, he s uden s basically eques ed o ien a ion o con inue wi h u u e aining: “Employmen u u e, oppo uni ies. T aining, new s udies, Mas e ’s deg ee, doc o a e, speciali ies, compe i i e en ance exams” (s u. 163). “Tha hey also in o m us on cong esses, ac i i ies ha we could ca y ou and hey a e use ul o ou cu iculum” (s u. 480). They also made commen s on he p o essional u u e, including ha in o he coun ies: “Subjec s ela ed o he employmen u u e, job banks, compe ence, p o essional oppo uni ies” (s u. 392), “on he possibili ies and job o e s in o he coun ies” (s u. 900). O he s we e ela ed o he knowledge o he labou ma ke and o being a good p o essional: “I would like o be in o med mo e on employmen subjec s ... Own expe iences o olun ee s ela ed o he subjec s s udied” (s u. 411). “On how o be a good p o essional” (s u. 895). On ca e p ac ice, he s uden s made a se ies o gene al commen s: “Subjec s ela ed o he nu sing p ac ice” (s u. 7). “I would like o he subjec o he p ac icums o be deal wi h” (s u. 507), also, ela ed o he planning, o ganisa ion, con en and e alua ion o hese p ac ices: “The planning o he p ac icums and hei e alua ion” (s u. 592). “Tha hey deal mo e wi h he p ac icums and explain hei con en ” (s u. 878). To end, hey made some commen s on he add essing o he p oblems: “P oblems ela ed wi h he clinical p ac ices” (s u. 640). Wi h espec o he uni e si y o ganisa ion, he s uden s e lec ed doub s in gene al: “…wha is he wo k in he depa men , in he uni e si y, e c.” (s u. 477). “Ques ions ela ed o he academic o ganisa ion and o he eaching planning...” (s u. 675). They asked o in o ma ion on esou ces, ans e s, aid and schola ships: “… in o m on he di e en possibili ies ha he uni e si y o e s you and he means we can use” (s u. 383). “On ans e s in he uni e si y” (s u. 375). “On SENECA and ERASMUS schola ships …” (s u. 323). “Subjec s ela ed o he uni e si y i sel (schola ships, aid, educa ional ma e ial...)” (s u. 836). Finally, he majo i y p oposed add essing subjec s on eques o demand om he s uden acco ding o his needs: “… ha he p o esso s ... be capable o dealing wi h any subjec ha he s uden s b ings up” (s u. 178). “Any subjec ha may se e us du ing ou s ay in he uni e si y” (s u. 46). “T anscenden al and impo an subjec s o he s uden ” (s u. 692). DISCUSSION Wi h ega d o he issues add essed in he men o ing p og am, signi ican di e ences we e obse ed in he esponses o p o esso s and s uden s. Thus, conside ing academic ma e s, he p o esso s s a ed a high pe cen age (93.4%), highe han ha ound in o he s udies(9,13), while he s uden s s a ed add essing hem a a lowe pe cen age (63.2%), wi h alues lowe han hose ob ained by o he s udies(9,10). The same occu ed wi h espec o he pe sonal issues, whe e 32.6% o he p o esso s a i med add essing hem always o nea ly always, wi h hese esul s coinciding wi h o he s udies(9,10,13,23). As o he s udies, only 5.1% a i med add essing pe sonal subjec s, wi h alues lowe han hose ob ained in o he s udies(10,13), despi e he ac En e me ía Global Nº 43 Julio 2016 Página 208 ha p e ious au ho s a i med ha he men o ing p og ams should se e o deal wi h pe sonal aspec s(3,5-7).. In ela ion o he p o essionaliza ion issues, 35.4% o he p o esso s a i med add essing hem always o nea ly always, compa ed o 11.8% o he s uden s. This low pe cen age o esponse con as s wi h he esul s o o he s udies in which much highe alues we e ob ained(13), especially i one akes in o accoun he impo ance o he men o ing p og ams in he p epa a ion o he s uden s and hei p o essional u u e in he labou ma ke (3-7,24). As o he ca e p ac ice, 46.4% o he p o esso s a i med add essing hem always o nea ly always, compa ed o 20.2% o he s uden s, wi h esul s simila o hose o o he s udies. The wo k o he heal hca e nu ses o he heal h ins i u ions as clinical men o s(25) should be highligh ed o acili a e he s uden s achie ing in si u he p o essional skills(24), pe haps he s uden s add ess his ype o issue on he ca e p ac ice wi h hese men o s and no as much wi h he p o esso pa icipa ing in his s udy. Wi h ega d o he uni e si y o ganisa ion, 23.2% o he p o esso s and 8% o he s uden s s a ed add essing his subjec , inding conside able disc epancy in he esul s o p e ious s udies, wi h hese esul s being lowe wi h espec o ano he p e ious s udy(13). Finally, in ela ion o add essing he issues on any subjec in he men o ing p og ams, in ou s udy 62.4% o he p o esso s a i med dealing wi h hem always o nea ly always, compa ed o 36% o he s uden s. In his ega d, in ano he s udy 79.2% o he p o esso s a i med ag eeing o comple ely ag eeing ha he men o ing p og ams should se e o add ess any p oblem o he s uden s (9). Wi h espec o he ela ions be ween he sociodemog aphic aspec s o he sample o p o esso s and he issues add essed in he men o ing p og ams, i s ands ou ha he p o esso s wi h a highe academic deg ee, eaching ull ime and wi h speci ic aining in men o ing a i med add essing a a highe le el he se o issues, especially on academic ma e s, p o essionaliza ion and uni e si y o ganisa ion. In con as , he p o esso s wi h a lowe academic deg ee and pa - ime dedica ion o eaching and wi h heal h ca e wo k a i med add essing wi h g ea e equency issues on ca e p ac ice. This las can be due o he ac ha since hese nu ses wo k in he ca e a ea(25), he s uden s usually go o hem when hey ha e doub s on ca e p ac ices. Finally, hose ha had men o ing in he Mas e ’s deg ee a i med add essing mo e p o essionaliza ion issues and on ca e p ac ices, han hose in Nu sing unde g adua e cou ses, and his could be due o he ac ha many o hese s uden s ha e al eady en e ed he labou ma ke . As o he subjec p e e ences o he s uden s, in i s place we e he academic subjec s, coinciding wi h he subjec mainly add essed in he men o ing p og ams, as shown om he abo e esponses. This ag eemen in he esul s ound in he wo ypes o analysis, quan i a i e and quali a i e, can indica e he impo ance ha add essing he academic subjec s has o he s uden s in he men o ing p og ams.(9-14). In second place, hey p e e ed he p o essionaliza ion subjec s, s a ing, he e o e, he unce ain ies ha he s uden s may ha e wi h ega d o he p o essional u u e, wi h his esul being cohe en wi h he impo ance gi en by p e ious au ho s(3-7,13,24).