Amy Stimpfel headshot

Amy Witkoski Stimpfel

Assistant Professor

1 212 992 9387

433 First Avenue
Room 658
New York, NY 10010
United States

expand all

collapse all

Professional overview

Amy Witkoski Stimpfel, PhD, RN joinedthe Rory Meyers College of Nursing as an assistant professor in 2013, following a T-32 post-doctoral fellowship in the Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Witkoski Stimpfel's research is focused on identifying modifiable conditions in nurses’ work environment that influence nurse well-being, such as occupational injuries and burnout, and clinical outcomes, such as quality of care and patient satisfaction. Her scholarship uses theories and methodologies from health services research, occupational health and safety, sleep/chronobiology, and nursing. Dr. Witkoski Stimpfel is currently the Co-Program Director of the NIOSH-funded doctoral training program in Occupational and Environmental Health Nursing.


University of Pennsylvania, 2011, PhD
University of Pennsylvania, 2009, MS
Villanova University, 2006, BSN

Honors and awards

At-large member, Advisory Committee of the Interdisciplinary Research Group on Nursing Issues (IRGNI) (2017)
T32 Post-doctoral fellowship, National Institute of Nursing Research (2011)
T01 Pre-doctoral fellowship, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2009)
Cum laude graduate, Villanova University (2006)
Inducted into Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society (2005)
Connelly-Delouvrier Scholarship for International Nursing in Ireland (2005)


Nursing workforce

Professional membership

American Nurses Association
American Organization of Nurse Executives
Eastern Nursing Research Society
Sigma Theta Tau International
Sleep Research Society



The meaning of “capacity building” for the nurse workforce in Sub-Saharan Africa: An integrative review.

Ridge, L., Klar, R., Witkoski, A., & Squires, A. (2018). International Journal of Nursing Studies. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.04.019

Beliefs and perceptions of mentorship among nursing faculty and traditional and accelerated undergraduate nursing students

Margaret-Navarra, A., Stimpfel, A. W., Rodriguez, K., Lim, F., Nelson, N., & Slater, L. Z. (2017). Nurse Education Today, 61, 20-24. 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.10.009
Background In order to meet the demands of a dynamic and complex health care landscape, nursing education must develop and implement programming to produce a highly educated nursing workforce. Interprofessional honors education in nursing with targeted mentorship is one such model. Purpose To describe undergraduate nursing student and faculty perceptions and beliefs of mentorship in the context of interprofessional honors education, and compare and contrast the perceptions and beliefs about mentorship in interprofessional honors education between undergraduate nursing students and faculty. Methods The study used a cross-sectional, descriptive design. Data were collected at an urban university in the northeast US, using a researcher-developed electronic survey. The sample included 24 full-time nursing faculty, and 142 undergraduate nursing students. Results Perceptions and beliefs regarding mentorship in the context of interprofessional honors education were similar for faculty and students, with both ranking mentorship among the most important components of a successful honors program. Conclusions Honors education with a dedicated mentorship component may be implemented to improve the undergraduate education experience, facilitate advanced degree attainment, and develop future nursing leaders.

Common predictors of nurse-reported quality of care and patient safety

Stimpfel, A. W., Djukic, M., Brewer, C. S., & Kovner, C. T. (2017). Health Care Management Review. 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000155
BACKGROUND:: In the era of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, quality of care and patient safety in health care have never been more visible to patients or providers. Registered nurses (nurses) are key players not only in providing direct patient care but also in evaluating the quality and safety of care provided to patients and families. PURPOSE:: We had the opportunity to study a unique cohort of nurses to understand more about the common predictors of nurse-reported quality of care and patient safety across acute care settings. APPROACH:: We analyzed cross-sectional survey data that were collected in 2015 from 731 nurses, as part of a national 10-year panel study of nurses. Variables selected for inclusion in regression analyses were chosen based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model, which is composed of work system or structure, process, and outcomes. RESULTS:: Our findings indicate that factors from three components of the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model–Work System (person, environment, and organization) are predictive of quality of care and patient safety as reported by nurses. The main results from our multiple linear and logistic regression models suggest that significant predictors common to both quality and safety were job satisfaction and organizational constraints. In addition, unit type and procedural justice were associated with patient safety, whereas better nurse-physician relations were associated with quality of care. CONCLUSION:: Increasing nurses’ job satisfaction and reducing organizational constraints may be areas to focus on to improve quality of care and patient safety. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS:: Our results provide direction for hospitals and nurse managers as to how to allocate finite resources to achieve improvements in quality of care and patient safety alike.

Barriers and facilitators of nurses' use of clinical practice guidelines: An integrative review

Jun, J., Kovner, C. T., & Stimpfel, A. W. (2016). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 60, 54-68. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.03.006
Background: Preventable harm continues to be one of the leading causes of patient death. Each year about 400,000 patients die from sepsis, hospital acquired infections, venous thromboembolism, and pulmonary embolism. However, as shown in the recent reduction in hospital acquired infections, the number of deaths could be reduced if healthcare providers used evidence-based therapies, which are often included in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Purpose: The purpose of this integrative review is to appraise and synthesize the current literature on barriers to and facilitators in the use of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) by registered nurses. Design: Whittemore and Knafl integrative review methodology was used. Primary quantitative and qualitative studies about the nurses' use of CPGs and published in peer-reviewed journals between January 2000 and August 2015 were included. Methods: The Critical Skills Appraisal Program (CASP) was used to critically appraise the quality of sixteen selected quantitative and qualitative studies. Results: Internal factors were attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge whereas format and usability of CPGs, resources, leadership, and organizational culture were external factors influencing CPG use. Conclusion: Given each barrier and facilitator, interventions and policies can be designed to increase nurses' use of CPGs to deliver more evidence based therapy. In order to improve the use of CPGs and to ensure high quality care for all patients, nurses must actively participate in development, implementation, and maintenance of CPGs.

Changes in patient and nurse outcomes associated with magnet hospital recognition

Kutney-Lee, A., Stimpfel, A. W., Sloane, D. M., Cimiotti, J. P., Quinn, L. W., & Aiken, L. H. (2015). Medical Care, 53(6), 550-557. 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000355
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.

Honors Programs: Current Perspectives for Implementation

Lim, F., Nelson, N., Stimpfel, A. W., Margaret-Navarra, A., & Slater, L. Z. (2015). Nurse Educator. 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000211
The changing demographics of the nursing workforce, including large numbers of impending retirements, highlight the need for innovative programs to attract the next generation of nursing leaders, educators, and researchers. Nursing honors programs provide an enhanced educational experience for high-achieving and highly motivated students, developing them as future nursing leaders. This review describes the current perspectives, characteristics, and values of nursing honors programs, opportunities for implementation, and recommendations for integration within nursing education.

Hospitals Known for Nursing Excellence Associated with Better Hospital Experience for Patients

Stimpfel, A. W., Sloane, D. M., Mchugh, M. D., & Aiken, L. H. (2015). Health Services Research. 10.1111/1475-6773.12357
Objective: To examine the relationship between Magnet recognition, an indicator of nursing excellence, and patients' experience with their hospitalization reported in the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. Data Sources: This secondary analysis includes cross-sectional data from the 2010 HCAHPS survey, the American Hospital Association, and the American Nurses Credentialing Center. Study Design: We conducted a retrospective observational study. Data Collection: Using common hospital identifiers, we created a matched set of 212 Magnet hospitals and 212 non-Magnet hospitals. Principal Findings: Patients in Magnet hospitals gave their hospitals higher overall ratings, were more likely to recommend their hospital, and reported more positive care experiences with nurse communication. Conclusions: Magnet recognition is associated with better patient care experiences, which may positively enhance reimbursement for hospitals.

Nonphysician Health Professionals

Stimpfel, A. W., Vanak, J. M., & Aiken, L. H. (2015). In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition (pp. 907-913). Elsevier Inc. 10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.14003-6
The organizational context of medical practice changed substantially over the past half century, resulting in new opportunities and a more favorable environment for the evolution of allied and nonphysician health professionals. This article chronicles the organizational developments leading to the growth in nonphysician health professions and the changing medical division of labor. Recent trends in nursing, the rise of advanced practice nurses and physician assistants (PAs), and the status of physical and occupational therapists are examined.

Scheduling and shift work characteristics associated with risk for occupational injury in newly licensed registered nurses: An observational study

Stimpfel, A. W., Brewer, C. S., & Kovner, C. T. (2015). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(11), 1686-1693. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.06.011
Background: Registered nurses across the globe bear a heavy injury burden. Every shift, nurses are exposed to a variety of hazards that can jeopardize their health, which negatively impacts their ability to provide high-quality patient care. Previous research suggests that inexperienced, or newly licensed nurses, may have an increased risk for certain occupational injuries. However, the current knowledge base is insufficient to fully understand how work hours influence newly licensed nurses' occupational injury, given the significant variation in hospital organization and work characteristics. Objective: To describe newly licensed nurses' shift work characteristics and determine the association between shift type and scheduling characteristics and nurse injury, before and after adjusting for individual and combined effects of demographics, external context, organizational context, and work context, following the Organization of Work model. Design: This study is a secondary analysis of a nationally representative survey of newly licensed registered nurses using a cross-sectional design. Participants: The analytic sample includes 1744 newly licensed registered nurses from 34 states and the District of Columbia who reported working in a hospital and were within 6-18 months of passing their state licensure exam at the time of survey administration. Methods: Descriptive statistics were calculated, followed by bivariate and multivariate Poisson regression models to assess the relationship between shift type and scheduling characteristics and nurse injury. Lastly, full models with the addition of demographics, external context, organizational context, and work context variables were calculated. Results: The majority (79%) of newly licensed nurses worked 12-h shifts, a near majority worked night shift (44%), and over half (61%) worked overtime (mandatory or voluntary) weekly. Nurses working weekly overtime were associated with a 32% [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.32, CI 1.07-1.62] increase in the risk of a needle stick and nurses working night shift were associated with a 16% [IRR 1.16, CI 1.02-1.33] increase in the risk of a sprain or strain injury. Conclusions: Overtime and night shift work were significantly associated with increased injury risk in newly licensed nurses independent of other work factors and demographic characteristics. The findings warrant further study given the long-term consequences of these injuries, costs associated with treatment, and loss of worker productivity.

Understanding the role of the professional practice environment on quality of care in magneta and non-magnet hospitals

Stimpfel, A. W., Rosen, J. E., & McHugh, M. D. (2015). Journal of Nursing Administration, 45(10), S52-S58. 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000015
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between Magnet RecognitionA and nurse-reported quality of care. BACKGROUND: MagnetA hospitals are recognized for nursing excellence and quality patient outcomes; however, few studies have explored contributing factors for these superior outcomes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of linked nurse survey data, hospital administrative data, and a listing of American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet hospitals. Multivariate regressions were modeled before and after propensity score matching to assess the relationship between Magnet status and quality of care. A mediation model assessed the indirect effect of the professional practice environment on quality of care. RESULTS: Nurse-reported quality of care was significantly associated with Magnet Recognition after matching. The professional practice environment mediates the relationship between Magnet status and quality of care. CONCLUSION: A prominent feature of Magnet hospitals, a professional practice environment that is supportive of nursing, plays a role in explaining why Magnet hospitals have better nurse-reported quality of care.