RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Genomic technologies such as genetic testing and precision treatments are rapidly becoming routine in oncology care, and nurses play an increasingly important role in supporting the growing demands for genomics-informed healthcare. Policy infrastructure such as competencies, standards, scope of practice statements, and education and curriculum frameworks are urgently needed to guide these practice and education changes. PURPOSE: This study is part of a larger three-phase project to develop recommendations and catalyze action for genomics-informed oncology nursing education and practice for the Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology and the Canadian Association of Schools of Nursing. This phase aimed to enhance understanding of policy needs and action drivers for genomics-informed oncology nursing education and practice through the perspectives of Canadian oncology nurses and patient partners. METHODS: Interpretive description methodology guided the study. Twenty semi-structured virtual interviews were conducted; 17 with oncology nurses in various domains of practice, and three with patient partner representatives. Data collection and analysis occurred concurrently. RESULTS: Our analysis identified three themes: 1) nurses and patients recognize that it is time for action, 2) nurses and patients see advantages to executing intentional, strategic, and collaborative policy development, and 3) leadership and advocacy are required to drive action. CONCLUSION: Nursing policy infrastructure is required to increase genomic literacy, support nurses in providing safe patient care, and establish clear roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities within the interdisciplinary team. Strong leadership and advocacy at the practice, organizational, and systems levels are vital to accelerating action.
RESUMO
AIM: To learn from two jurisdictions with mature genomics-informed nursing policy infrastructure-the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK)-to inform policy development for genomics-informed oncology nursing practice and education in Canada. DESIGN: Comparative document and policy analysis drawing on the 3i + E framework. METHODS: We drew on the principles of a rapid review and identified academic literature, grey literature and nursing policy documents through a systematic search of two databases, a website search of national genomics nursing and oncology nursing organizations in the US and UK, and recommendations from subject matter experts on an international advisory committee. A total of 94 documents informed our analysis. RESULTS: We found several types of policy documents guiding genomics-informed nursing practice and education in the US and UK. These included position statements, policy advocacy briefs, competencies, scope and standards of practice and education and curriculum frameworks. Examples of drivers that influenced policy development included nurses' values in aligning with evidence and meeting public expectations, strong nurse leaders, policy networks and shifting healthcare and policy landscapes. CONCLUSION: Our analysis of nursing policy infrastructure in the US and UK provides a framework to guide policy recommendations to accelerate the integration of genomics into Canadian oncology nursing practice and education. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: Findings can assist Canadian oncology nurses in developing nursing policy infrastructure that supports full participation in safe and equitable genomics-informed oncology nursing practice and education within an interprofessional context. IMPACT: This study informs Canadian policy development for genomics-informed oncology nursing education and practice. The experiences of other countries demonstrate that change is incremental, and investment from strong advocates and collaborators can accelerate the integration of genomics into nursing. Though this research focuses on oncology nursing, it may also inform other nursing practice contexts influenced by genomics.