Faculty

Purpose: This paper recounts the history and experiences of one academic medical center that sought to improve the care of elderly patients by adopting and adapting the Geriatric Resource Nurse (GRN) model recommended by the Nurses Improving the Care of Healthsystem Elderly (NICHE) program. A formal evaluation examined the perceptions, opinions and attitudes of non-GRN nursing peers, Nurse Managers (NMs) and members of the Inter-Professional Advisory Board (IAB) regarding GRN practices and the institution's NICHE program. Design: A qualitative research design with purposive sampling was utilized. Methods: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups conducted in the fall/winter 2017 were analyzed using standard content analysis methods of isolating and grouping contextual themes without a predefined framework. Findings: The institution's GRN training program, a hybrid of the national NICHE program and organization-developed components, has strong support among NMs, members of the IAB and other RNs. However, there exist many misconceptions, erroneous information and misunderstandings about the program and the roles and expectations of GRNs that have hindered the likelihood of producing desired outcomes. Conclusions: Training GRNs was insufficient in disseminating and implementing evidenced-based geriatric practices in this hospital. Future work in this area would benefit from integrating concepts and methods from dissemination and implementation science when developing, launching, and sustaining NICHE programs. Clinical relevance: Integrating principles and models of dissemination and implementation science can increase consistent use of evidence based practices and the likelihood of improved geriatric patient outcomes in NICHE hospitals.

The national Nurses Improving Care for Healthsystem Elders (NICHE) program and the geriatric resource nurse (GRN) model promote training a geriatric nursing workforce to serve in hospitals and elsewhere. Literature exists on the NICHE program but this is the first to study the opinions, attitudes, and perceptions of GRNs in practice. Our organization’s hybrid GRN model, first adopted in 1999, combines materials from national NICHE program with homegrown resources and has GRNs practicing in a wide range of clinical specialties. This descriptive study, using survey design and administrative data, examined GRNs trained prior to 2017 to assess their (i) demographic, employment, and other characteristics; (ii) satisfaction with components of training program; (iii) ability to apply new knowledge and skills in practice; (iv) perceived support from leadership; and (v) perceived barriers encountered. Program outcomes, such as completion rates and workplace satisfaction, as well as areas for improvement and recommendation for future research, are also discussed.

This article describes our experience participating in a multisite collaborative study involving frontline nurses and operational failures (OFs). We encountered a range of challenges conducting the study as proposed by the study's coordinating center (CC), which hindered our ability to meet our goals and objectives. We identified 3 general areas in which our expectations and actual experience diverged: 1) research resources, design, and methods; 2) CC communications and deliverables; and 3) influencing organizational change. Nurse executives considering collaborative research or assessing methods to engage clinical nurses in organizational improvements will benefit from our experience.

Professional practice models guide nursing practice by giving meaning to the work of nurses. They elevate the practice from tasks to theory, from skills to knowledge, and remind us that the patient and family are at the center of our practice. Professional practice models are one of the foundations of the Magnet Recognition Program. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and implementation of a professional practice model in a healthcare system, which includes three hospitals and over 80 ambulatory practices in the New York City region.

The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recommendation to remove barriers to practice and enable advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) and registered nurses (RNs) to practice to the full extent of their education and training. 1 expanded the use of advanced practice nurses in the country. The more restrictive Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and Residency Review Committee (RRC) requirements on residency training and work hours increased the hiring of APRNs to fill the void created by a reduction in GME trainees.2 Finally, the Affordable Care Act created additional demand for more providers to meet the needs of the newly insured population, particularly in primary care.3.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, 2010) and the Institute of Medicine's (IOM, 2011) Future of Nursing report have prompted changes in the U.S. health care system. This has also stimulated a new direction of thinking for the profession of nursing. New payment and priority structures, where value is placed ahead of volume in care, will start to define our health system in new and unknown ways for years. One thing we all know for sure: we cannot afford the same inefficient models and systems of care of yesterday any longer. The Data-Driven Model for Excellence in Staffing was created as the organizing framework to lead the development of best practices for nurse staffing across the continuum through research and innovation. Regardless of the setting, nurses must integrate multiple concepts with the value of professional nursing to create new care and staffing models. Traditional models demonstrate that nurses are a commodity. If the profession is to make any significant changes in nurse staffing, it is through the articulation of the value of our professional practice within the overall health care environment. This position paper is organized around the concepts from the Data-Driven Model for Excellence in Staffing. The main concepts are: Core Concept 1: Users and Patients of Health Care, Core Concept 2: Providers of Health Care, Core Concept 3: Environment of Care, Core Concept 4: Delivery of Care, Core Concept 5: Quality, Safety, and Outcomes of Care. This position paper provides a comprehensive view of those concepts and components, why those concepts and components are important in this new era of nurse staffing, and a 3-year challenge that will push the nursing profession forward in all settings across the care continuum. There are decades of research supporting various changes to nurse staffing. Yet little has been done to move that research into practice and operations. While the primary goal of this position paper is to generate research and innovative thinking about nurse staffing across all health care settings, a second goal is to stimulate additional publications. This includes a goal of at least 20 articles in Nursing Economic$ on best practices in staffing and care models from across the continuum over the next 3 years.

Objective: The aim of the pilot study was to design an innovative model of leadership development, Leadership Laboratory (LL), grounded in the lived experiences and peer best practices of 43 cross-disciplinary nurse managers. Background: The Institute of Medicine/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation study, The Future of Nursing, reinforces the need to prepare nurses for leadership positions. Methods: A 1-year participatory action research study was designed to develop 3 LLs involving nurse managers as participants, co-creators, and evaluators of the unique learning format. Results: Analysis of qualitative and quantitative data revealed consistent and significantly positive results in leadership skill areas in all 3 LLs. Participants identified elements that distinguished LLs from traditional seminars and trainings sessions, including opportunities to gain from peer-to peer consultation, strategies, and support. Conclusions: Participants in the 1-year pilot demonstrated significant learning based on postsession and postproject assessments of the LLs. Data also described the unique attributes of a peer-driven approach to leadership development.

The discipline of nursing continues to evolve in keeping with the dramatic expansion of scientific knowledge, technology, and a concomitant increase in complexity of patient care in all practice settings. Changing patient demographics require complex planning for co-morbidities associated with chronic diseases and life-saving advances that have altered mortality in ways never before imagined. These changes in practice, coupled with findings from sophisticated nursing research and the continuous development of new nursing knowledge, call for realignments of the relationships among academic faculty in schools of nursing, advanced practice nurse administrators, and staff nurses at the forefront of practice. This article offers a model designed to bridge the gaps among academic settings, administrative offices and the euphemistic "bedsides" where staff nurses practice. Here we describe the nurse attending model in place at the New York University Langone Medical Center (NYULMC) and provide qualitative data that support progress in our work.

Objective: This initiative was designed to develop a reliable instrument to measure the activities of acute care nurse practitioners (ACNPs). A sound, standardized method for measuring ACNP productivity will assist nursing leaders and administrators to demonstrate the effectiveness and productivity of ACNPs in and across institutions and systems. Background data: Current research on ACNPs uses many different methodologies and research designs, and fails to provide standard definitions to measure practice patterns, making it difficult to generalize across settings. Methods: Advisory groups from 2 New York academic health science centers developed a survey that covered the demographic, educational, and employment characteristics of ACNPs, and a 20-item classification of advanced practice nursing activities. Sixty- one ACNPs completed surveys, a 58% response rate. Results: The survey found strong similarities at both institutions. ACNPs spend most of their time in 5 activities involving direct care and 4 activities within indirect care. Strong Cronbach alphas confirmed that the instrument was reliable. Conclusions/implications: The availability of a reliable instrument for measuring ACNP practice patterns provides administrators with a powerful tool to demonstrate the contributions of their ACNPs. In addition, a standardized method for data collection can contribute to healthcare workforce policy discussions.