Survey Research: Do All RN Types Have the Same Perceptions Regarding Professional Nursing Governance?

OBJECTIVE: Researchers examined professional nursing governance perception differences by RN type (clinical, manager, and other RNs), and nurse-related outcome associations. BACKGROUND: Shared governance is associated with improved nurse-related outcomes. Understanding differences in RN types regarding shared governance perceptions is important and not well studied. METHODS: Mean Index of Professional Nursing Governance (IPNG) scores from 3 hospitals' 502 RNs were used to evaluate associations by RN type and unit-based nurse-related outcomes. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used. RESULTS: Shared governance was the predominant finding (overall score and 4 of 6 subscale scores) with no significant differences by RN type. Traditional governance was scored for 1 subscale (control over personnel), which was not significant. There were no significant differences in the IPNG score associations with outcomes data by RN type. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical nurses, managers, and other RN types perceived their governance as shared, without significant difference in the nurses' perceptions based on role.

Pandemic Challenges: Keeping Nursing Research Alive.

Nursing has been pandemic-slammed. Although 2020 will be forever entangled with the COVID-19 pandemic, we, as nurse leaders, must continue to move forward and beyond this endemic challenge. We cannot lose focus on generating new knowledge to continue nursing excellence and move our profession forward.

Effect of Shared Governance on Nurse-Sensitive Indicator and Satisfaction Outcomes by Magnet® Recognition Status.

OBJECTIVE: Researchers examined associations between Index for Professional Nursing Governance (IPNG) types and outcomes. BACKGROUND: Effects of professional nursing governance on nurse-related outcomes by Magnet® status are not well studied. METHODS: Associations were evaluated between average IPNG scores from 2170 RNs, and nurse-sensitive indicators (NSIs) as well as patient and RN satisfaction outcomes (N = 205 study units; 20 hospitals), following Magnet requirements. RESULTS: Magnet hospitals had significantly better IPNG shared governance scores than non-Magnet hospitals (Magnet, 106.7; non-Magnet, 101.3). For Magnet hospitals, units scoring as shared governance outperformed traditional governance for 9 of 19 outcomes (47.4%) (NSI, 2; patient satisfaction, 3; RN satisfaction, 4). Self-governance outperformed shared governance for 8 of 15 outcomes (53.3%) (NSI, 2; patient satisfaction, 6; RN satisfaction, 0). For non-Magnet hospitals, shared governance significantly outperformed traditional governance for 1 of 15 outcomes (6.7%) (patient satisfaction). CONCLUSIONS: Having shared or self-governance is a strategy that can be considered by nurse leaders to improve select nurse-related outcomes.

Effect of a Nurse-Led, Patient-Centered, Gratitude Intervention on Patient Hospitalization Experience.

OBJECTIVE: Objectives were to evaluate patient perceptions of a nurse-led, patient-centered gratitude intervention and if nurses identified actionable items to improve patient's hospitalization experience. BACKGROUND: Research demonstrates positive effects of gratitude and caring interventions on patient health and well-being. Evidence is sparse regarding nurse-led gratitude interventions improving hospitalized patient's experiences. METHODS: In this pilot study, 91 adult medical patients completed gratitude forms twice daily for up to 6 shifts and a study discharge form documenting intervention perceptions. In response to the patients' gratitude-related feedback, RNs recorded patient experience-related actions they and interprofessional teams could implement. RESULTS: On average, patients perceived the nurse-led gratitude intervention as helpful (4.2) (1 = very unhelpful, 5 = very helpful) and improved hospitalization experiences (4.3) (1 = seldom, 5 = never). Most of the time actions were required or to be taken, based on patient gratitude intervention responses. CONCLUSIONS: Patient perceptions of nurse-led gratitude intervention demonstrated helpfulness and improved hospitalization experience.

Effect of Shared Governance on Nurse-Sensitive Indicator and Satisfaction Outcomes: An International Comparison.

OBJECTIVE: Researchers examined associations between Index for Professional Nursing Governance (IPNG) scores and outcomes, by US and international hospitals. BACKGROUND: Nursing governance and effects on nurse-related outcomes are not well studied. METHODS: Associations were evaluated using average IPNG scores from 2170 RNs and nurse-sensitive indicators (NSIs) and patient and RN satisfaction outcomes (n = 205 study units, 20 hospitals, 4 countries). RESULTS: International units had better IPNG shared governance scores (113.5; US = 100.6; P < 0.001), and outcomes outperforming unit benchmarks (6 of 15, 40.0%; US = 2 of 15, 13.3%). Shared governance significantly outperformed traditional governance for 5 of 20 (25.0%) US outcomes (patient satisfaction = 1, RN satisfaction = 4) and for 3 of 11 (27.3%) international (patient satisfaction = 1, RN satisfaction = 2). Internationally, self-governance significantly outperformed traditional governance and shared governance for 5 of 12 (41.7%) outcomes (NSI = 2, patient satisfaction = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Shared governance is a strategy that can be considered by nurse leaders for improving select outcomes.

Use of Evidence-based Practice Models and Research Findings in Magnet-Designated Hospitals Across the United States: National Survey Results.

BACKGROUND: All nurses have responsibilities to enculturate evidence-based practice (EBP) and translate and implement research findings into nursing care, practices, and procedures. AIMS: To report EBP-related findings from the national Hospital-Based Nursing Research Characteristics, Care Delivery Outcomes, and Economic Impact Survey questionnaire. METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey research study of 181 nursing research leaders, 127 responded to these questions: "Has your hospital adopted or does it use a model of evidence-based practice?" "If yes, what is the name of the model and how is it used?" "Does your hospital implement (translate) findings from nursing research into clinical practice?" "Describe how your hospital implements these findings and whose responsibility it is." "What factors do you believe facilitate the implementation of findings from nursing research into clinical practice at your hospital?" Qualitative content analyses were used. RESULTS: Over 90% of nursing research leaders specified that their hospital used an EBP model and implements findings into practice. The most frequently reported models were the Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice, Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model, and Advancing Research and Clinical Practice Through Close Collaboration Model. EBP models were used most frequently for education and training, nurse residency programs, and EBP and research fellowships. Findings were implemented through policy and procedure committee processes, shared governance structures, and EBP processes. Those responsible for implementing findings were project leads, nursing professional practice councils, and clinical nurse specialists and advanced practice nurses. Implementation facilitators were nursing leadership, dissemination of findings, and engaged and educated nurses. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: These new findings report >90% EBP model use and implementation. All nurses, especially our leaders, have responsibilities to evaluate EBP and how nursing research findings are implemented (translated) into practice. Ideally, engaged and educated nurses who enculturate, support, and sustain EBP will facilitate advancing nursing practice to improve patient and work environment-related outcomes.

US Nurses' Perceptions Regarding Caring for Suspected, Probable, and Confirmed Ebola Virus Disease Patients, Part 1: A Quantitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined US hospital, ambulatory/outpatient facility, and clinic nurses' perceptions regarding care of persons under investigation (PUIs) and confirmed Ebola virus disease (EVD) patients and EVD nursing workforce impact. BACKGROUND: Timely research was warranted to better understand nurses' perceptions. METHODS: This survey research used convenience sampling of RNs, LPNs, and nurse technicians. Respondents completed a 45-item electronic validated survey. RESULTS: Overall average perceived risk with providing care was higher for confirmed EVD patients (5.2) than PUIs (4.8) (0 = no risk, 10 = highest risk). Few had cared for confirmed EVD patients (0.3%) or PUIs (0.7%). Whereas 48.4% felt prepared in protecting themselves from contracting EVD, 25.2% were concerned with contracting EVD. More nurses (45.9%) felt they should be able to opt out of caring for confirmed EVD patients as compared with those caring for PUIs (39.2%). EVD emergence had not affected (85.8%) nurses' willingness to provide direct patient care; however, 6.8% reported EVD has decreased years planned in the nursing workforce. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses reported moderate risk for EVD-related patient care; 6.8% may leave the workforce earlier.

Nurses' Perceptions on Ebola Care in the United States, Part 2: A Qualitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined qualitative comments from an online survey of nurses' perceptions regarding care of persons under investigation and patients with confirmed Ebola virus disease (EVD) in the United States. BACKGROUND: Additional insight into nurses' perceptions regarding EVD was warranted. METHODS: Survey design used convenience sampling of RNs, licensed practical nurses, and nurse technicians, who responded to 8 open-ended survey questions. RESULTS: Most respondents (618/966 [64.0%]) provided comments. The top 5 of the 13 primary themes were lack of preparedness/readiness; training, education, and improved communications needed; fear of EVD transmission; lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and infection prevention; and nurses not treated professionally. CONCLUSIONS: Noting multiple concerns, most respondents reported that EVD care could be most safely provided when all parties involved are prepared and when nurses are educated and trained in evidence-driven practices with appropriate PPE and infection control procedures.

A prospective, randomized, single-blind study evaluating the effectiveness, tolerability, and cost of colonoscopy bowel preparations.

Colorectal cancer, the third most common cancer in U.S. adults, can be detected early through colonoscopy. Thorough bowel preparation facilitates successful colonoscopy. Effectiveness, tolerability, and costs of 3 bowel preparations were compared in patients undergoing outpatient screening colonoscopy. In this prospective, randomized, single-blind study, comparing three preparation protocols, 209 of 276 consented subjects completed (Protocol [N = 67] = HalfLytely© 1 L × 2 doses and bisacodyl 5 mg delayed release tablets × 2 tablets; Protocol 2 [N = 74] = MiraLAX® 5 tablespoons × 2 doses and bisacodyl 5 mg tablets × 2 tablets; and Protocol 3 [N = 68] = MoviPrep 1 L × 2 doses). Patients completed symptom diaries and a gastroenterologist rated effectiveness. Most subjects were White females, aged 59 years (mean). Protocol 1 was the most effective regimen, but Protocol 2 was the most tolerable and cost-effective. While the three bowel protocol differences were not statistically significant for all outcomes measured, there were clinically meaningful differences. As Protocol 1 was most effective, HalfLytely© and bisacodyl is recommended for patients prior to colonoscopy. For patients who cannot tolerate HalfLytely© or MoviPrep, or with financial concerns, Protocol 2 (MiraLAX® & bisacodyl) is alternatively recommended.

BSN completion barriers, challenges, incentives, and strategies.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to explore RN perceptions regarding barriers/challenges and incentives/supports for BSN completion and identify recommendations to increase RN BSN completion. BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine's 2011 The Future of Nursing report recommended the proportion of RNs with a BSN increase to 80% by 2020. METHOD: This qualitative study included 41 RNs who participated in 1 of 6 focus groups based on their BSN completion status. RESULTS: Primary themes were sacrifices, barriers/challenges, incentives/supports, value, how to begin, and pressure. Primary BSN completion barriers/challenges were work-life balance and economic issues. Incentives/supports identified were financial compensation, assistance from employer and academic institution, and encouragement from family. Institutional strategies recommended for increasing BSN completion rates were improved access to education and financial support facilitated by collaboration between hospitals and academic institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Exploring RN barriers/challenges and incentives/supports for BSN completion can lead to implementation of institutional strategies, such as tuition reimbursement and academic collaboration.

Incidence and cost of nurse workplace violence perpetrated by hospital patients or patient visitors.

INTRODUCTION: Workplace violence against nurses is a serious problem. Nurses from a US urban/community hospital system employing more than 5,000 nurses researched the incidence of workplace violence against nurses perpetrated by patients or visitors in their hospital system. METHODS: Survey research and retrospective database review methods were used. Nurse participants (all system-employed nurse types) completed a 34-item validated survey in electronic format. Retrospective database review provided annual nurse workplace violence injury treatment and indemnity charges. Institutional review board approval was received. RESULTS: Survey research participants (N = 762) were primarily white female registered nurses, aged 26 to 64 years, with more than 10 years of experience. Over the past year, 76.0% experienced violence (verbal abuse by patients, 54.2%; physical abuse by patients, 29.9%; verbal abuse by visitors, 32.9%; and physical by visitors, 3.5%), such as shouting or yelling (60.0% by patients and 35.8% by visitors), swearing or cursing (53.5% by patients and 24.9% by visitors), grabbing (37.8% by patients and 1.1% by visitors), and scratching or kicking (27.4% by patients and 0.8% by visitors). Emergency nurses (12.1%) experienced a significantly greater number of incidents (P < .001). Nurses noted more than 50 verbal (24.3%) and physical (7.3%) patient/visitor violence incidents over their careers. Most serious career violence incidents (n = 595, 78.1%) were physical (63.7%) (60.8% by patients and 2.9% by visitors), verbal (25.4%) (18.3% by patients and 7.1% by visitors), and threatened physical assault (10.9%) (6.9% by patients and 4.0% by visitors). Perpetrators were primarily white male patients, aged 26 to 35 years, who were confused or influenced by alcohol or drugs. Per database review, annual workplace violence charges for the 2.1% of nurses reporting injuries were $94,156 ($78,924 for treatment and $15,232 for indemnity). DISCUSSION: Nurses are too commonly exposed to workplace violence. Hospitals should enhance programs for training and incident reporting, particularly for nurses at higher risk of exposure, caring for patients with dementia or Alzheimer disease, patients with drug-seeking behavior, or drug- or alcohol-influenced patients.

Effect of preoperative incentive spirometry patient education on patient outcomes in the knee and hip joint replacement population.

PURPOSE: This study examined the effects of preoperative incentive spirometry (IS) education (POISE) on postoperative outcomes for knee and hip total joint replacement patients. DESIGN: In this prospective study, 140 patients were randomized to Group 1 (POISE intervention = 50 completing) or Group 2 (no intervention = 56 completing) (34 dropped). METHODS: The Group 1 intervention consisted of formal instruction preoperatively for IS home use, postoperative use, and IS volumes documentation. Group 2 patients received no intervention. Patients recorded postoperative IS volumes, which were used to determine return to baseline volume. FINDINGS: One hundred six patients completed the study. Most were Caucasian females averaging 64 years. Although IS return to baseline volume time was not significantly different between groups, POISE patients had fewer postoperative complications, hospital days, and charges. POISE patients ranked the intervention as helpful. CONCLUSIONS: Although IS volumes were not significantly different between groups, POISE patients had better outcomes and ranked the intervention as helpful.

Evaluation of fall risk assessment tools for psychiatric patient fall prevention: a comparative study.

The Hendrich II Fall Risk Model™ (Hendrich II) is used to determine patient fall risks. However, the WilsonSims Fall Risk Assessment Tool (WSFRAT) is more specific to psychiatric patients. The current study tested the Hendrich II and WSFRAT simultaneously to determine which tool was the most predictive for patient falls in a psychiatric population. Fall risk assessments using the Hendrich II and WSFRAT tools were completed through discharge. Fall risk assessment scores, medications, and falls data were documented. Fifty patients who met eligibility criteria generated 319 observations; of the 50 patients, two (4%) experienced falls. Sensitivity was 100% for the Hendrich II and WSFRAT, with all patients properly categorized as high risk for falling. Both assessments had similar specificity (Hendrich II = 67.8%; WSFRAT = 63.1%). Both tools have similar specificity; thus, additional research is warranted.

Exploring how nurses and managers perceive shared governance.

BACKGROUND: Nurse managers have a pivotal role in the success of unit-based councils, which include direct care nurses. These councils establish shared governance to provide innovative, quality-based, and cost-effective nursing care. PURPOSE: This study explored differences between direct care nurses' and nurse managers' perceptions of factors affecting direct care nurses' participation in unit-based and general shared governance activities and nurse engagement. METHODS: In a survey research study, 425 direct care RNs and nurse managers were asked to complete a 26-item research survey addressing 16 shared governance factors; 144 participated (response rate = 33.8%). RESULTS: Most nurse participants provided direct care (N = 129, 89.6%; nurse managers = 15, 10.4%), were older than 35 (75.6%), had more than 5 years of experience (76.4%), and worked more than 35 hours per week (72.9%). Direct care nurses' and managers' perceptions showed a few significant differences. Factors ranked as very important by direct care nurses and managers included direct care nurses perceiving support from unit manager to participate in shared governance activities (84.0%); unit nurses working as a team (79.0%); direct care nurses participating in shared governance activities won't disrupt patient care (76.9%); and direct care nurses will be paid for participating beyond scheduled shifts (71.3%). Overall, 79.2% had some level of engagement in shared governance activities. Managers reported more engagement than direct care nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse managers and unit-based councils should evaluate nurses' perceptions of manager support, teamwork, lack of disruption to patient care, and payment for participation in shared governance-related activities. These research findings can be used to evaluate hospital practices for direct care nurse participation in unit-based shared governance activities.

What causes near-misses and how are they mitigated?

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the reasons hospital RNs attribute to near-misses and the techniques they used to mitigate these near-misses to prevent serious reportable events. BACKGROUND: Our health system developed this definition for the study: A near-miss is a variation in a normal process that, if continued, could have a negative impact on patients. METHODS: Study participants were RNs who completed a survey about a self-reported near-miss or another RN's near-miss they'd witnessed. Data collected included participant demographics, near-miss occurrence by day of week and time, near-miss type, and attributed causes. RESULTS: A total of 144 near-miss types were self-reported or witnessed by 123 respondents; of these, 43 (35%) self-reported a near-miss event and 80 (65%) witnessed a near-miss event. The respondents identified medication administration (19%) and transcription errors (10%) as the most frequent types of near-misses (N = 144). Selecting from 412 factors related to near-misses, more RNs attributed near-misses to personal factors than institutional factors. Top personal factors were not following policy and inappropriate decision making or critical assumptions. Top institutional factors were work-related interruptions and distractions, and poor communication about a patient. A total of 400 techniques were used to mitigate the near-misses, nearly one per causative factor identified. Top techniques used were stop, think, act, review (STAR) and verification of proper procedures or actions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital administrators should consider both personal and institutional factors when evaluating patient-safety programs. Education about mitigating techniques for near-misses is imperative for RNs.

Developing a patient-centered ISHAPED handoff with patient/family and parent advisory councils.

Our hospital system used Lean strategies to develop a new process for the change-of-shift bedside handoff titled ISHAPED (I = Introduce, S = Story, H = History, A = Assessment, P = Plan, E = Error Prevention, and D = Dialogue). Several teams collaborated with a Parent Advisory Council and a Patient/Family Advisory Council to design a study to explore patient perceptions of the handoff. The findings from the study along with recommendations from the councils were used to develop education modules on implementing patient-centered handoffs.

Helping nurses care for self, family, and patients through the nurses living fit intervention.

BACKGROUND: More than half of United States nurses are estimated to be overweight or obese. Interventions are needed that help nurses live healthier lifestyles. With most registered nurses being female and with an average age of 45.5 years in the category most likely to be obese, it is not promising that US nurses will become healthier over time without intervention. The Nurses Living Fit (NLF) program, an exercise- and nutrition-based intervention innovated by nurses, was developed to decrease body mass index in nurse participants and to help nurse's care for themselves and their families and patients. SUBJECTS: A total of 217 nurses self-selected to the NLF intervention (n = 108) or contrast (no intervention; n = 109) groups. METHODS: The NLF program included exercise (12 once-weekly sessions, 1 hour each), yoga (4 once-monthly sessions, 1 hour each), nutrition education (4 once-monthly sessions, 1 hour each taught by registered dietitians), diary completion (completed daily for 4 weeks specifying time spent on exercise/yoga, types and amount of food consumed, amount of water consumed, and hours slept), and healthy lifestyle principles education. Evaluation of the NLF program components was also completed. RESULTS: The NLF participants had significant decreases in body mass index (NLF = -0.5 kg/m; contrast = -0.2 kg/m) and waist circumference (NLF = -0.9 in; contrast = -0.2 in). Overall, program component evaluation demonstrated that participants wanted more personalized exercise, more nutrition education, and year-round program provision. As a result of the NLF program, nurses specified they exercised more and improved nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based intervention or programs are needed to educate nurses on healthy lifestyles. Nurse leaders need to promote healthy workplace environments, which can be done in part through the facilitation of exercise- and nutrition-based programs, such as NLF, to help nurses better care for themselves and their families and patients.

What causes near-misses and how are they mitigated?

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the reasons hospital RNs attribute to near-misses and the techniques they used to mitigate these near-misses to prevent serious reportable events. BACKGROUND: Our health system developed this definition for the study: A near-miss is a variation in a normal process that, if continued, could have a negative impact on patients. METHODS: Study participants were RNs who completed a survey about a self-reported near-miss or another RN's near-miss they'd witnessed. Data collected included participant demographics, near-miss occurrence by day of week and time, near-miss type, and attributed causes. RESULTS: A total of 144 near-miss types were self-reported or witnessed by 123 respondents; of these, 43 (35%) self-reported a near-miss event and 80 (65%) witnessed a near-miss event. The respondents identified medication administration (19%) and transcription errors (10%) as the most frequent types of near-misses (N = 144). Selecting from 412 factors related to near-misses, more RNs attributed near-misses to personal factors than institutional factors. Top personal factors were not following policy and inappropriate decision making or critical assumptions. Top institutional factors were work-related interruptions and distractions, and poor communication about a patient. A total of 400 techniques were used to mitigate the near-misses, nearly one per causative factor identified. Top techniques used were stop, think, act, review (STAR) and verification of proper procedures or actions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital administrators should consider both personal and institutional factors when evaluating patient-safety programs. Education about mitigating techniques for near-misses is imperative for RNs.