Representation of dark skin tones in foundational nursing textbooks: An image analysis.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to analyze and quantify the representation of dark skin tones (DST) images/graphics across fifteen foundational and clinical nursing textbooks to understand the degree of portrayed diversity in current nursing texts. BACKGROUND: The United States (U.S.) population is becoming more ethnically and racially diverse. There is a scarcity of nursing literature, studies, and educational materials on the assessment and early recognition of common skin assessment in patients with dark skin tones (DST). The underrepresentation of people with DST images in didactic material suggests that omissions of these images in educational resources may introduce bias in health care provider education and practice. METHODS: Fifteen popular foundational and clinical nursing textbooks were selected and analyzed. All the photo images and drawn graphics in these textbooks were coded according to Fitzpatrick's skin phototype (FSP) scale, which categorizes skin tone as (a) "Light" or Fitzpatrick scale I or II, (b) "Medium" or Fitzpatrick scale III or IV, and (c) "Dark" or Fitzpatrick scale V or VI. The training was provided for data collectors before analysis to ascertain good inter-rater reliability (Cohen's kappa = 0.960 for light skin tone, Cohen's kappa = 0.899 for medium skin tone, and Cohen's kappa = 0.913 for dark skin tone). RESULTS: Analysis of 14,192 photo images and drawn graphics depicting skin tone was completed across 15 foundational and clinical nursing textbooks. 12.3 % of photo images and 2.4 % of drawn graphics depicted dark skin tones, compared to 60.9 % of photo images and 82.8 % of drawn graphics that displayed light skin tones in these textbooks. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing textbooks overrepresent light skin tones and underrepresent dark skin tones. While the approximate racial distribution of the U.S. population is 59.3 % non-Hispanic-White, 13.6 % Black/African American, and 26.6 % Person of Color, the images and graphics of skin tones represented 68 % light, 15 % medium, and 9.4 % dark. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: All healthcare providers are expected and required to deliver competent clinical care to an increasingly diverse population. For teaching-learning, more visual representations of DST and comparative images between what to expect in dark, medium, and light skin tones can help improve knowledge deficits and increase health equity.

Changes in patient and nurse outcomes associated with magnet hospital recognition.

BACKGROUND: Research has documented an association between Magnet hospitals and better outcomes for nurses and patients. However, little longitudinal evidence exists to support a causal link between Magnet recognition and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare changes over time in surgical patient outcomes, nurse-reported quality, and nurse outcomes in a sample of hospitals that attained Magnet recognition between 1999 and 2007 with hospitals that remained non-Magnet. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective, 2-stage panel design using 4 secondary data sources. SUBJECTS: One hundred thirty-six Pennsylvania hospitals (11 emerging Magnets and 125 non-Magnets). MEASURES: American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet recognition; risk-adjusted rates of surgical 30-day mortality and failure-to-rescue, nurse-reported quality measures, and nurse outcomes; the Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index. METHODS: Fixed-effects difference models were used to compare changes in outcomes between emerging Magnet hospitals and hospitals that remained non-Magnet. RESULTS: Emerging Magnet hospitals demonstrated markedly greater improvements in their work environments than other hospitals. On average, the changes in 30-day surgical mortality and failure-to-rescue rates over the study period were more pronounced in emerging Magnet hospitals than in non-Magnet hospitals, by 2.4 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (P<0.01) and 6.1 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (P=0.02), respectively. Similar differences in the changes for emerging Magnet hospitals and non-Magnet hospitals were observed in nurse-reported quality of care and nurse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In general, Magnet recognition is associated with significant improvements over time in the quality of the work environment, and in patient and nurse outcomes that exceed those of non-Magnet hospitals.