目的 了解护理硕士专业学位（Master of Nursing Specialist，MNS）研究生“双导师制”实施现状。方法 2023年3月—4月，采取便利抽样法，抽取195名MNS研究生作为调查对象，采用自行设计的MNS研究生“双导师制”实施情况问卷及研究生对导师的满意度量表对其进行调查。结果 共回收有效问卷179份，有效问卷回收率为91.8%。179名MNS研究生中，选择“双导师”指导模式为“按需指导”者最多，为64名（35.8%）；选择“分段定期指导”者最少，为20名（11.2%）。超过90%的MNS研究生认同“双导师”根据研究方向共同指导其制订个性化培养计划，共同指导其阅读文献、撰写综述和选题，共同参加开题报告会、中期考核会（和预答辩、答辩会）。MNS研究生对第一导师的满意度得分高于对第二导师的满意度得分[5.00（4.66，5.00）分比5.00（4.34，5.00）分；Z=-2.491，P=0.013]。接受不同模式指导的MNS研究生对第一导师/第二导师的满意度得分比较，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论 MNS研究生“双导师”指导模式较为多样；“双导师”履行职责情况虽较为良好，但仍有提升空间；MNS研究生对“双导师”满意度较高。院校应致力于构建规范、高效的MNS研究生“双导师”指导模式，清晰界定各方的职责与角色，并通过打造监管与激励机制、定期了解MNS研究生的意见与反馈，以提升MNS研究生“双导师制”成效，提高MNS研究生的培养质量。

Objective To understand the current implementation status of the “double tutorial system” for master of nursing specialist（MNS） students. Methods From March to April 2023，a convenient sampling method was used to select 195 MNS students as survey participants. A self-designed questionnaire on the implementation of the “double tutorial system” for MNS students and a satisfaction scale for graduate students towards their mentors were issued for the investigation. Results A total of 179 valid questionnaires were collected，with a valid recovery rate of 91.8%. Among the 179 MNS students，the most popular choice for the “double mentor” guidance mode was “guidance on demand”，with 64 students（35.8%）. Meanwhile，the least popular choice was “regular segmented guidance”，with 20 students（11.2%）. More than 90% of MNS students agreed that the “double mentors” jointly guided them in developing personalized training plans，reading literature，writing reviews，and selecting topics based on their research directions；and jointly participated in the proposal presentation，mid-term assessment（as well as pre-defense and defense sessions）. Specifically，the satisfaction scores of MNS students towards their first mentors were higher than those towards their second mentors[5.00（4.66，5.00） vs. 5.00（4.34，5.00）；Z=-2.491，P=0.013]. There were statistically significant differences in the satisfaction scores of MNS students receiving different forms of guidance towards their first and second mentors（P<0.05）. Conclusion The guidance form of “double tutorial” for MNS students varies greatly. Although the performance of “double mentors” in fulfilling their duties is relatively good，there is still room for improvement. MNS students hold a high level of satisfaction with the “double mentor”. Universities and colleges should strive to establish a standardized and efficient “double mentor” guidance model for MNS students，clearly define the responsibilities and roles of “double mentors”，create a regulatory mechanism as well as an incentive mechanism and regularly understand students’ opinions and feedback，eventually enhancing the effect of the “double tutorial system” and cultivation quality of the MNS students.