Ruth Martin-Misener

A case study of nurse practitioner role implementation in primary care: what happens when new roles are introduced?

BackgroundAt the time of this study (2009) the role of the nurse practitioner was new to the province of British Columbia. The provincial government gave the responsibility for implementing the role to health authorities. Managers of health authorities, many of whom were unfamiliar with the role, were responsible for identifying the need for the NP role, determining how the NP would function, and gaining team members’ acceptance for the new role.MethodThe purpose of the study was to explain the process of nurse practitioner role implementation as it was occurring and to identify factors that could enhance the implementation process. An explanatory, single case study with embedded units of analysis was used. The technique of explanation building was used in data analysis. Three primary health care settings in one health authority in British Columbia were purposively selected. Data sources included semi-structured interviews with participants (n=16) and key documents.ResultsThe results demonstrate the complexity of implementing a new role in settings unfamiliar with it. The findings suggest that early in the implementation process and after the nurse practitioner was hired, team members needed to clarify intentions for the role and they looked to senior health authority managers for assistance. Acceptance of the nurse practitioner was facilitated by team members’ prior knowledge of either the role or the individual nurse practitioner. Community health care providers needed to be involved in the implementation process and their acceptance developed as they gained knowledge and understanding of the role.ConclusionThe findings suggest that the interconnectedness of the concepts of intention, involvement and acceptance influences the implementation process and how the nurse practitioner is able to function in the setting. Without any one of the three concepts not only is implementation difficult, but it is also challenging for the nurse practitioner to fulfill role expectations. Implications for research, policy, practice and education are discussed.

Factors affecting nurse practitioner role implementation in Canadian practice settings: an integrative review.

AIM To review the literature about the Canadian experience with nurse practitioner role implementation and identify influencing factors. BACKGROUND Although nurse practitioners have been in existence for more than 40 years, their integration into healthcare systems has been challenging. While frameworks exist to guide implementation of these roles, clear identification of factors influencing role implementation may inform best practices. Given that Canada has witnessed considerable growth in nurse practitioner positions in the past decade, an exploration of its experience with role implementation is timely. DATA SOURCES A review of Canadian literature from 1997 to 2010 was conducted. Electronic databases including CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Source: Nursing Academic Edition, Medline, Social Science Index, PubMed, Web of Science and PsychINFO and government and professional organization websites were searched. METHODS An integrative review was performed guided by Whittemore and Knafls method. RESULTS Ten published studies and two provincial reports were included. Numerous facilitators and barriers to implementation were identified and analysed for themes. Three concepts influencing implementation emerged: involvement, acceptance and intention. Involvement is defined as stakeholders actively participating in the early stages of implementation. Acceptance is recognition and willingness to work with nurse practitioner. Intention relates to how the role is defined. CONCLUSION This integrative review revealed three factors that influence nurse practitioner role implementation in Canada: involvement, acceptance and intention. Strategies to enhance these factors may inform best practice role implementation processes.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of advanced practice nurses in long-term care.

AIM To report quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of advanced practice nursing roles, clinical nurse specialists and nurse practitioners, in meeting the healthcare needs of older adults living in long-term care residential settings. BACKGROUND Although studies have examined the effectiveness of advanced practice nurses in this setting, a systematic review of this evidence has not been conducted. DESIGN Quantitative systematic review. DATA SOURCES Twelve electronic databases were searched (1966-2010); leaders in the field were contacted; and personal files, reference lists, pertinent journals, and websites were searched for prospective studies with a comparison group. REVIEW METHODS Studies that met inclusion criteria were reviewed for quality, using a modified version of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group risk of bias assessment criteria. RESULTS Four prospective studies conducted in the USA and reported in 15 papers were included. Long-term care settings with advanced practice nurses had lower rates of depression, urinary incontinence, pressure ulcers, restraint use, and aggressive behaviours; more residents who experienced improvements in meeting personal goals; and family members who expressed more satisfaction with medical services. CONCLUSION Advanced practice nurses are associated with improvements in several measures of health status and behaviours of older adults in long-term care settings and in family satisfaction. Further exploration is needed to determine the effect of advanced practice nurses on health services use; resident satisfaction with care and quality of life; and the skills, quality of care, and job satisfaction of healthcare staff.

A scoping literature review of collaboration between primary care and public health

AIM The purpose of this scoping literature review was to determine what is known about: 1) structures and processes required to build successful collaborations between primary care (PC) and public health (PH); 2) outcomes of such collaborations; and 3) markers of their success. BACKGROUND Collaboration between PC and PH is believed to enable more effective individual and population services than what might be achieved by either alone. METHODS The study followed established methods for a scoping literature review and was guided by a framework that identifies systemic, organizational and interactional determinants for collaboration. The review was restricted to articles published between 1988 and 2008. Published quantitative and qualitative primary studies, evaluation research, systematic and other types of reviews, as well as descriptive accounts without an explicit research design, were included if they addressed either the structures or processes to build collaboration or the outcomes or markers of such collaboration, and were published in English. FINDINGS The combined search strategy yielded 6125 articles of which 114 were included. Systemic-level factors influencing collaboration included: government involvement, policy and fit with local needs; funding and resource factors, power and control issues; and education and training. Lack of a common agenda; knowledge and resource limitations; leadership, management and accountability issues; geographic proximity of partners; and shared protocols, tools and information sharing were influential at the organizational level. Interpersonal factors included having a shared purpose; philosophy and beliefs; clear roles and positive relationships; and effective communication and decision-making strategies. Reported benefits of collaboration included: improved chronic disease management; communicable disease control; and maternal child health. More research is needed to explore the conditions and contexts in which collaboration between PC and PH makes most sense and potential gains outweigh the associated risks and costs.

Cost effectiveness and outcomes of a nurse practitioner–paramedic–family physician model of care: the Long and Brier Islands study

Aim This longitudinal study was designed to address four research questions and the hypothesis; that adults living in a rural community receiving primary health care and emergency services from a team that included an on-site nurse practitioner (NP) and paramedics and an off-site family physician would, over time, demonstrate evidence of improved psychosocial adjustment and less expenditure of health care resources. Background In Canada, there is a growing awareness and commitment to addressing the challenges of providing primary health care services in rural areas. A literature review supported the role of NPs in primary health care and a potential role for paramedics. No studies were found that evaluated the combination of NPs, paramedics and physicians as providers of primary health care. Methods Structured questionnaires, individual and group interviews with patients, health and social service care providers and administrators and community members were used to describe and evaluate the impact of the model of care over the three years of the study. Findings The innovative model of care resulted in decreased cost, increased access, a high level of acceptance and satisfaction and effective collaboration among care providers. Organizational structures to support the innovative model of primary health care were identified.

Primary health care nurse practitioners in Canada

Canada, like many countries, is in the midst of primary health care reform. A key priority is to improve access to primary health care, especially in remote communities and areas with physician shortages. As a result, there is an increased emphasis on the integration of primary health care nurse practitioners. As of March 2006, legislation exists in all provinces and two territories in Canada that allows nurse practitioners (NPs) to implement their expanded nursing role. In this paper, we will briefly review the historical development of the NP role in Canada and situate it in the international context; describe the NP role, supply of NPs in the country, and the settings in which they work; propose an NP practice model framework; summarize facilitators and barriers to NP role implementation in primary health care delivery; and outline strategies to address the barriers.

Cost-effectiveness of nurse practitioners in primary and specialised ambulatory care: systematic review

Objective To determine the cost-effectiveness of nurse practitioners delivering primary and specialised ambulatory care. Design A systematic review of randomised controlled trials reported since 1980. Data sources 10 electronic bibliographic databases, handsearches, contact with authors, bibliographies and websites. Included studies Randomised controlled trials that evaluated nurse practitioners in alternative and complementary ambulatory care roles and reported health system outcomes. Results 11 trials were included. In four trials of alternative provider ambulatory primary care roles, nurse practitioners were equivalent to physicians in all but seven patient outcomes favouring nurse practitioner care and in all but four health system outcomes, one favouring nurse practitioner care and three favouring physician care. In a meta-analysis of two studies (2689 patients) with minimal heterogeneity and high-quality evidence, nurse practitioner care resulted in lower mean health services costs per consultation (mean difference: −€6.41; 95% CI −€9.28 to −€3.55; p<0.0001) (2006 euros). In two trials of alternative provider specialised ambulatory care roles, nurse practitioners were equivalent to physicians in all but three patient outcomes and one health system outcome favouring nurse practitioner care. In five trials of complementary provider specialised ambulatory care roles, 16 patient/provider outcomes favouring nurse practitioner plus usual care, and 16 were equivalent. Two health system outcomes favoured nurse practitioner plus usual care, four favoured usual care and 14 were equivalent. Four studies of complementary specialised ambulatory care compared costs, but only one assessed costs and outcomes jointly. Conclusions Nurse practitioners in alternative provider ambulatory primary care roles have equivalent or better patient outcomes than comparators and are potentially cost-saving. Evidence for their cost-effectiveness in alternative provider specialised ambulatory care roles is promising, but limited by the few studies. While some evidence indicates nurse practitioners in complementary specialised ambulatory care roles improve patient outcomes, their cost-effectiveness requires further study.

Practice patterns and perceived impact of clinical nurse specialist roles in Canada: Results of a national survey

BACKGROUND Clinical nurse specialists are recognized internationally for providing an advanced level of practice. They positively impact the delivery of healthcare services by using specialty-specific expert knowledge and skills, and integrating competencies as clinicians, educators, researchers, consultants and leaders. Graduate-level education is recommended for the role but many countries do not have formal credentialing mechanisms for clinical nurse specialists. Previous studies have found that clinical nurse specialist roles are poorly understood by stakeholders. Few national studies have examined the utilization of clinical nurse specialists. OBJECTIVE To identify the practice patterns of clinical nurse specialists in Canada. DESIGN A descriptive cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS Self-identified clinical nurse specialists in Canada. METHODS A 50-item self-report questionnaire was developed, pilot-tested in English and French, and administered to self-identified clinical nurse specialists from April 2011 to August 2011. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics and content analysis. RESULTS The actual number of clinical nurse specialists in Canada remains unknown. The response rate using the number of registry-identified clinical nurse specialists was 33% (804/2431). Of this number, 608 reported working as a clinical nurse specialist. The response rate for graduate-prepared clinical nurse specialists was 60% (471/782). The practice patterns of clinical nurse specialists varied across clinical specialties. Graduate-level education influenced their practice patterns. Few administrative structures and resources were in place to support clinical nurse specialist role development. The lack of title protection resulted in confusion around who identifies themselves as a clinical nurse specialist and consequently made it difficult to determine the number of clinical nurse specialists in Canada. CONCLUSIONS This is the first national survey of clinical nurse specialists in Canada. A clearer understanding of these roles provides stakeholders with much needed information about clinical nurse specialist practice patterns. Such information can inform decisions about policies, education and organizational supports to effectively utilize this role in healthcare systems. This study emphasizes the need to develop standardized educational requirements, consistent role titles and credentialing mechanisms to facilitate the identification and comparison of clinical nurse specialist roles and role outcomes internationally.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of clinical nurse specialists in outpatient roles: a systematic review

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Increasing numbers of clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) are working in outpatient settings. The objective of this paper is to describe a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CNSs delivering outpatient care in alternative or complementary provider roles. METHODS We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and seven other electronic databases, 1980 to July 2012 and hand-searched bibliographies and key journals. RCTs that evaluated formally trained CNSs and health system outcomes were included. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess quality of evidence for individual outcomes. RESULTS Eleven RCTs, four evaluating alternative provider (n = 683 participants) and seven evaluating complementary provider roles (n = 1464 participants), were identified. Results of the alternative provider RCTs (low-to-moderate quality evidence) were fairly consistent across study populations with similar patient outcomes to usual care, some evidence of reduced resource use and costs, and two economic analyses (one fair and one high quality) favouring CNS care. Results of the complementary provider RCTs (low-to-moderate quality evidence) were also fairly consistent across study populations with similar or improved patient outcomes and mostly similar health system outcomes when compared with usual care; however, the economic analyses were weak. CONCLUSIONS Low-to-moderate quality evidence supports the effectiveness and two fair-to-high quality economic analyses support the cost-effectiveness of outpatient alternative provider CNSs. Low-to-moderate quality evidence supports the effectiveness of outpatient complementary provider CNSs; however, robust economic evaluations are needed to address cost-effectiveness.

The Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Pain Protocol in Long Term Care

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of (1) dissemination strategies to improve clinical practice behaviors (eg, frequency and documentation of pain assessments, use of pain medication) among health care team members, and (2) the implementation of the pain protocol in reducing pain in long term care (LTC) residents. DESIGN A controlled before-after design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the pain protocol, whereas qualitative interviews and focus groups were used to obtain additional context-driven data. SETTING Four LTC facilities in southern Ontario, Canada; 2 for the intervention group and 2 for the control group. PARTICIPANTS Data were collected from 200 LTC residents; 99 for the intervention and 101 for the control group. INTERVENTION Implementation of a pain protocol using a multifaceted approach, including a site working group or Pain Team, pain education and skills training, and other quality improvement activities. MEASUREMENTS Resident pain was measured using 3 assessment tools: the Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate, the Pain Assessment in the Communicatively Impaired Elderly, and the Present Pain Intensity Scale. Clinical practice behaviors were measured using a number of process indicators; for example, use of pain assessment tools, documentation about pain management, and use of pain medications. A semistructured interview guide was used to collect qualitative data via focus groups and interviews. RESULTS Pain increased significantly more for the control group than the intervention group over the 1-year intervention period. There were significantly more positive changes over the intervention period in the intervention group compared with the control group for the following indicators: the use of a standardized pain assessment tool and completed admission/initial pain assessment. Qualitative findings highlight the importance of reminding staff to think about pain as a priority in caring for residents and to be mindful of it during daily activities. Using onsite champions, in this case advanced practice nurses and a Pain Team, were key to successfully implementing the pain protocol. CONCLUSIONS These study findings indicate that the implementation of a pain protocol intervention improved the way pain was managed and provided pain relief for LTC residents.