Three Years' Experience.

Until spring 2023, nurses in professional development did not have terminal degree options tailored to their needs. In response, The Ohio State University College of Nursing launched the Doctor of Nursing Education (DNE) program with two tracks: academic nurse educator and nursing professional development (NPD). This program addresses the national shortage of doctorally prepared nurse educators and prepares graduates to lead educational change. This article describes the curriculum and leadership focus of the NPD track of the DNE program, aligned with the Association for Nursing Professional Development scope and standards of practice (2022). It highlights four capstone projects implemented by NPD practitioners in health care settings. Students conducted evidence-based, quality improvement, and program evaluation projects that improved clinical teaching, nurse certification, interdisciplinary collaboration, and new graduate nurse mentoring. These NPD projects highlight the transformative impact of the DNE program, illustrating how doctoral education drives meaningful improvements in health care practice across diverse settings.

In the nursing professional development (NPD) specialty, the NPD practice model visually represents the NPD scope of practice and reflects a growing, vibrant specialty. It delineates the who, what, when, why, where, and how of the specialty practice and is approved by the American Nurses Association. This column reflects upon the evolution of the NPD practice model and delineates its updates in the fourth edition of the Nursing Professional Development: Scope and Standards of Practice.

This research was undertaken to delineate the future role of nursing professional development (NPD) specialists. Using a modified e-Delphi technique, seven key roles for NPD (partner for practice transitions, learning facilitator, change agent, mentor, leader, champion of scientific inquiry, and advocate for NPD specialty) and their concomitant competencies evolved. Results of this study informed the update of the NPD Scope and Standards of Practice and may be used to identify competencies for the specialty.

Graduate nursing education programs' focus on preparation for academia results in many graduate nurses being unprepared to function as nursing professional development (NPD) practitioners in the practice environment. This article describes the development of an innovative collaborative partnership designation program and how a specialty organization, health system, and academia partnered to create an educational program to prepare NPD practitioners. The designation program provides a practical tool for use by NPD departments to advocate for the NPD specialty.

Nurse Practitioners in Emergency Care

FigureThe concept of peer review can be interpreted very differently among nurses and healthcare professionals. Some think of a subject expert reviewing a manuscript for a journal's editorial staff. Others think of regulatory bodies requiring hospitals to have an internal process to ensure that healthcare team members are competent and able to perform within their scope of practice.1 Still others think of peer review as a quality assurance process in which healthcare team members audit each other's documentation to validate care standardization. We provide insight into a nursing peer review process designed to evaluate performance, and the journey to its implementation. A well-defined peer review process and tool, utilized in conjunction with a nurse's annual performance evaluation, is one way to infuse meaningful peer input into a performance appraisal. This system allows nurses to provide insight into one another's strengths and opportunities for growth. A detailed approach was used to create, develop, and sustain a nursing peer review program that's flexible enough to be used by all staff members within a pediatric hospital system. In addition to promoting professional growth among nursing staff, this process also meets the current peer review standards set by the Magnet Recognition Program® and The Joint Commission. The ultimate goal of sharing this information is to help other organizations that are just beginning the peer review process and those that have struggled in the past with development and implementation to bring about a sustainable change. This, in turn, will promote nursing cohesiveness and professionalism as we work together to bring healthcare into a new era. Organizational standardization Our organization embarked on an initiative to create a standardized peer review process that would be utilized by all nursing departments. The process needed to be integrated organizationally and applicable to clinical nurses within both inpatient and outpatient environments. This journey began with a review of the current literature and an examination of the current peer review practice at other Magnet® facilities. Through this process, it was discovered that the majority of these facilities utilized and defined peer review in a variety of ways. We identified variation in the management of the peer review process within our own organization. Acknowledging the vast array of discrepancies within and external to the organization, a task force of clinical nurses was developed to redefine the way our organization administered the clinical nurse peer review process. This task force also included two leadership liaisons who served as resources to the clinical nurses during this development and provided insight into the management side of the peer review process. There were four steps in our process: (1) defining a peer, (2) developing a peer review form, (3) transforming the process, and (4) implementing the process. Who's a peer? The first step in our work involved evaluating, discussing, and reaching a consensus on the definition of peer. In order to standardize the peer review process, the task force recognized a true definition was needed to measure success with the new process. Looking at previous peer review practice in the organization, many nurses and department directors had different definitions and ideas of what it meant to be a peer. Some departments included other disciplines in a nurse's specialty for evaluations, whereas others utilized only fellow nursing staff members. The task force agreed that the purpose of peer review is to foster professional growth and development among staff members by utilizing a process through which measurable outcomes are assessed. After much dialog, the task force adopted the definition of peer utilized by the American Nurses Association, which defines a peer as an individual of the same rank or standing according to the established standards of practice.2 Form development The next step in redefining the peer review process was to develop a new peer review tool that could be transferrable and applicable among the various nursing specialties and departments. Key areas identified by the task force for development of this tool included creating a short, concise form that's easy to understand with limited directions and applicable to all clinical nursing departments. To achieve this goal, the task force worked collaboratively to establish eight domains that would provide nurses with a peer evaluation framework. These domains were established through open dialog, including question-and-answer sessions, review of current job descriptions, and evaluation of other tools utilized by various Magnet facilities. Through this work, a common set of core expectations were identified and utilized in the development of each domain. These domains encompass the essential clinical nurse job functions, behavioral competencies, and basic roles and responsibilities throughout the organization. The domains can be found in Table 1.Table 1: The eight domains of peer evaluationTo further guide and support high-quality peer feedback, three to five specific, measurable objectives were created and listed under each domain for nurses to measure performance. These objectives were developed to guide peers in evaluating each nurse by providing focused, pertinent feedback. The task force wanted to eliminate vague, nonspecific feedback that didn't facilitate the identification of future growth opportunities. The objectives created by the task force assist peers in identifying evidence from the nurse's daily work, communication, time management, and interdisciplinary interactions. Each domain also included a comment field, allowing nurses the autonomy to provide open-ended feedback and elaborate on outstanding work or opportunities for the employee's growth and improvement. The comment section was extremely important in the solicitation of meaningful feedback because it allowed nurses to provide examples to reinforce the ratings selected for the objectives. The directions on the new tool clearly state that comments are mandatory for certain ratings to allow for elaboration and examples. The task force believed a Likert rating scale was essential to standardize the peer review process. The previous process utilized a vague, numerical score that hadn't historically provided nurses with adequate descriptions of their work ethic and performance. Lower scores were considered negative responses, whereas higher scores equated to positive responses. After review of the current literature, the task force employed a 4-point Likert scale comprising "not met," "approaching," "meets expectations," and "exceeds expectations." In addition to the scaled questions, an open-ended question "Do you feel comfortable working with this nurse?" was added to the form. Utilizing a mixed-method methodology, Likert scale, and open-ended question format allowed the evaluating nurse a better opportunity to provide real-life contextual examples related to the evaluated nurse's care.3 Process transformation After the peer evaluation tool was created, the task force focused its attention on creating a framework to aid departments in implementing the new peer review process. Throughout our hospital, there are units of vastly different sizes. Some nursing departments have four to six clinical nurses, whereas other departments have as many as 150 to 200 clinical nurses on staff. The variability in staff sizes meant that the task force had to be creative in determining how many peer reviewers should evaluate each nurse annually and how these reviewers should be selected. With the new process, each nurse receives feedback from two to four RNs. Limiting the number of peer evaluations eliminated the previous dissatisfaction and/or barrier of evaluators being asked to fill out 20 to 30 peer evaluations a month due to exceedingly large nursing departments. The task force also allowed clinical nurses to select one to two peers of their choice to provide feedback; the management team selected the remaining peers. Implementation After the task force completed the new peer review tool and process recommendations, the nursing department directors and the CNO gave the approval for implementation. The standardized peer review form, along with the revised process, was implemented using various educational modalities. The first presentation was provided to the inpatient and outpatient nursing directors to inform them about the new form and the revised process. The directors were provided with handouts outlining the changes and educational fact sheets for the staff members to use as a reference. The task force increased its availability to ensure educational consistency to all clinical nurses by attending and presenting at unit-based councils, charge nurse meetings, and department-wide staff development programs. The feedback received from the different educational presentations was extremely positive. Feedback discussed the tool's ease of use, applicability to all nursing departments, appropriate form length, and measurable objectives that allowed nurses to comment on focused job roles and responsibilities. Other feedback included the improved functionality of the new rating scale and the process change that limited the number of requests for peer evaluations. Some directors expressed resistance to changing their current peer review practice. Certain directors thought feedback from four nurses wasn't enough if the department had a high number of nursing staff members. After an open discussion with the task force chairperson and the directors of large departments, it was agreed that meaningful feedback from four people would be adequate. Other directors mentioned that they liked the idea of adding specific clinical skills for peer evaluation. However, we couldn't add specific skills because they wouldn't universally apply to the various nursing department specialties. The task force collected all comments and feedback, and created a frequently asked questions document to address these concerns and explain the thought process behind the decisions made about the tool and recommendations. Directors were then provided with answers to and rationales for their specific questions and concerns, creating a consistent message and clarity to all departments. All education and implementation occurred over the course of 4 months. During this time, the task force worked with web development to formulate an electronic version of the peer evaluation document for the purpose of online submission. The electronic document was widely popular because it eliminated the use of paper and facilitated tool access for all clinical nurses. Staff members were able to complete the tool online and submit the evaluation through the organization's intranet directly to the person who requested the feedback. The task force also concluded that in order for this new tool and process to remain functional and meaningful, continued evaluation of its use would be essential. Reaching the top As we diligently work to move the nursing profession forward, it's important to remember that peer review can positively impact not only an individual's nursing practice, but also an entire hospital system. Nurses are at the forefront of healthcare transformation and are integral to sustainable practice improvement. By empowering clinical nurses to lead this initiative, we've been able to successfully introduce, develop, and support a valuable peer review process across our organization. Utilizing a comprehensive peer review tool can help organizations improve patient outcomes and patient satisfaction.

The State of Advanced Practice Registered Nursing in Alabama

This article shares an updated structure for school nurse evaluation using the School Nursing Practice Framework and the fourth edition of the School Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice. This evaluation structure is modeled on work originally published in the January 2020 issue of NASN School Nurse. The original linking of the Framework for 21st Century School Nursing Practice and the 3rd edition of the School Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice allowed the school nurse and their evaluators to understand the complex roles and responsibilities of the school nurse. This updated version incorporates the growing understanding of social issues and complex health concerns impacting school nursing practice. The School Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice (4th ed.) competencies recognize issues including emerging technologies, structural barriers to health, and the complex health needs of students in an environment of inequities, violence, and underfunding, as well as the impact of natural disasters, public health crises, human migration, and social media on students. The updated School Nursing Practice Framework (Framework) likewise incorporates an understanding of the foundational aspect of the standards and the interconnectedness of the key principles. Our revised evaluation tool accomplishes the integration of the revised Framework with the updated standards of school nursing practice.

This paper reports on the qualitative findings from a national review of a nursing and midwifery scope of practice framework. Scope of professional practice frameworks offers a system of rules and principles to regulate its members and demonstrate its responsibility to society. Key issues in reviewing the scope of practice include notions of specialist and advanced practice, accountability, autonomy, competence, supervision, continuing professional development and delegation. Evaluation of scope of practice frameworks has particular application value to nurses, midwives, regulatory bodies and healthcare employers across the globe. A mixed methods approach was used. This included a national survey of nurses and midwives and focus groups and interviews with key stakeholders. The qualitative data are reported in this paper. Focus groups and interviews were conducted among a convenience purposive sample of key stakeholders, including nurses and midwives working in the widest range of services and settings in 2014. The participants contributed to thirteen focus groups and thirteen interviews. Six global themes, as follows: Evolution of the nursing and midwifery professions and practice; Scope of practice: understanding and use; Expanding scope of practice; Professional competence; Practice setting and context; Reflections on the current framework. Practitioners understand the scope of professional practice and while some see it as empowering others see it as potentially restrictive. Nurses and midwives are generally willing to expand their scope of practice and see it as resulting in improved patient care, improvement in overall quality of standards and increased job satisfaction.

There is a global shortage of midwives, whose services are essential to meet the healthcare needs of pregnant women and newborns. Evidence suggests that if enough midwives, trained and regulated to global standards, were deployed worldwide, maternal, and perinatal mortality would decline significantly. Health workforce planning estimates the number of midwives needed to achieve population coverage of midwifery interventions. However, to provide a valid measure of midwifery care coverage, an indicator must consider not only the raw number of midwives, but also their scope and competency. The tasks midwives are authorized to deliver and their competency to perform essential skills and behaviors provide crucial information for understanding the availability of safe, high-quality midwifery services. Without reliable estimates for an adequate midwifery workforce, progress toward ending preventable maternal and perinatal mortality will continue to be uneven. The International Labor Organization (ILO) and the International Confederation of Midwives (ICM) suggest standards for midwifery scope of practice and competencies. This paper compares national midwifery regulations, scope, and competencies in three countries to the ILO and ICM standards to validate measures of midwife density. We also assess midwives' self-reported skills/behaviors from the ICM competencies and their acquisition. We compared midwives' scope of practice in Argentina, Ghana, and India to the ILO Tasks and ICM Essential Competencies for Midwifery Practice. We compared midwives self-reported skills/behaviors with the ICM Competencies. Univariate and bivariate analysis was conducted to describe the association between midwives' skills and selected characteristics. National scopes of practice matched two ILO tasks in Argentina, four in India, and all in Ghana. National standards partially reflected ICM skills in Categories 2, 3, and 4 (pre-pregnancy and antenatal care; care during labor and birth; and ongoing care of women and newborns, respectively) in Argentina (range 11% to 67%), mostly in India (range 74% to 100%) and completely in Ghana (100% match). 1,266 midwives surveyed reported considerable variation in competency for skills and behaviors across ICM Category 2, 3, and 4. Most midwives reported matching skills and behaviors around labor and childbirth (Category 2). Higher proportions of midwives reported gaining basic skills through in-service training and on-job-experience than in pre-service training. Estimating the density of midwives needed for an adequate midwifery workforce capable of providing effective population coverage is predicated on a valid numerator. A reliable and valid count of midwives to meet population needs assumes that each midwife counted has the authority to exercise the same behaviors and reflects the ability to perform them with comparable competency. Our results demonstrate variation in midwifery scopes of practice and self-reported competencies in comparison to global standards that pose a threat to the reliability and validity of the numerator in measures of midwife density, and suggest the potential for expanded authorization and improved education and training to meet global reference standards for midwifery practice has not been fully realized. Although the universally recognized standard, this study demonstrates that the complex, composite descriptions of skills and behaviors in the ICM competencies make them difficult to use as benchmark measures with any precision, as they are not defined or structured to serve as valid measures for assessing workforce competency. A simplified, content-validated measurement system is needed to facilitate evaluation of the competency of the midwifery workforce.

4C The Comfort Wheel: An Interactive Case Study Tool for Pain Education

The American Academy of Pediatrics joins with other specialty organizations in emphasizing the obligation of objectivity when its members respond to requests to serve as expert witnesses in the judicial system. Regardless of the source of the request, such testimony ought to embody the relevant facts and the expert's knowledge, experience, and best judgment regarding the case. At the same time, the AAP reiterates that it cannot condone participation of its members in legal actions in which their testimony will impugn some performances that clearly fall within the accepted standards of practice or, conversely, will endorse some obviously deficient practices. Because experts are relied upon to help courts and juries understand the "standards of practice" as applicable to a given case, care must be exercised that such "expert testimony" does not narrowly reflect the experts' views about applicable standards to the exclusion of other acceptable choices. The Academy considers it unethical for any expert to provide testimony that does not adhere scrupulously to the goal of objectivity. The AAP also recognizes its responsibility and that of its Fellows for continued efforts to improve health care for children. However, the Academy believes that many claims of medical malpractice represent the response of a litigation-oriented society to a technologically advanced form of health care that has, unfortunately, fostered some unrealistic expectations and often unexpectedly high risks. As technology continues to become more complex, risks as well as benefits continue and sometimes increase, making a complication-free practice of medicine less and less probable.

India has made significant progress in improving maternal and child health. However, there are persistent disparities in maternal and child morbidity and mortality in many communities. Mistreatment of women in childbirth and gender-based violence are common and reduce women’s sense of safety. Recently, the Government of India committed to establishing a specialized midwifery cadre: Nurse Practitioners in Midwifery (NPMs). Integration of NPMs into the current health system has the potential to increase respectful maternity care, reduce unnecessary interventions, and improve resource allocation, ultimately improving maternal–newborn outcomes. To synthesize the evidence on effective midwifery integration, we conducted a desk review of peer-reviewed articles, reports and regulatory documents describing models of practice, organization of health services and lessons learned from other countries. We also interviewed key informants in India who described the current state of the healthcare system, opportunities, and anticipated challenges to establishing a new cadre of midwives. Using an intersectional feminist theoretical framework, we triangulated the findings from the desk review with interview data to identify levers for change and recommendations. Findings from the desk review highlight that benefits of midwifery on outcomes and experience link to models of midwifery care, and limited scope of practice and prohibitive practice settings are threats to successful integration. Interviews with key informants affirm the importance of meeting global standards for practice, education, inter-professional collaboration and midwifery leadership. Key informants noted that the expansion of respectful maternity care and improved outcomes will depend on the scope and model of practice for the cadre. Domains needing attention include building professional identity; creating a robust, sustainable education system; addressing existing inter-professional issues and strengthening referral and quality monitoring systems. Public and professional education on midwifery roles and scope of practice, improved regulatory conditions and enabling practice environments will be key to successful integration of midwives in India.

Holistic Nursing as a Specialty: Holistic Nursing—Scope and Standards of Practice

Aim: This study was conducted to examine postgraduate theses on kangaroo care in the field of nursing in Türkiye. Method: The research was conducted using the document analysis method. The research population consists of 53 postgraduate theses conducted between 2015-2025 in the Nursing Departments as a result of the search conducted in the National Thesis Center of the Council of Higher Education using the keyword "kangaroo care". As a result of the search, 18 postgraduate theses that met the criteria were included in the study. The data were categorized based on the year the theses were conducted, the type of the thesis, its purpose, research design, sample group and number, data collection tools and results. Descriptive statistical analyzes such as number and percentage were used in the evaluation of the data. Results: Of the postgraduate theses on kangaroo care, 72% were master's theses and 27.7% were doctoral theses. It was determined that 55.5% of all theses were randomized controlled experimental, 22.2% were quasi-experimental designs; 5.5% of the doctoral theses used mixed method, 5.5% used systematic review and meta-analysis designs. It was determined that the majority of theses were conducted in the Department of Nursing and the Department of Child Health and Diseases Nursing. It was revealed that the sample group consisted mostly of premature infants. Conclusion: Based on the results of the examined postgraduate theses, it was revealed that kangaroo care increases sucking success and comfort in infants, reduces stress, positively affects physiological parameters, reduces interventional pain; and also has many benefits for mothers and fathers. In order to increase the number of infants who benefit from kangaroo care, which has numerous benefits for newborns, the knowledge and skill levels of nursing students regarding kangaroo care should be increased by using active learning methods, and regular in-service trainings should be planned for neonatal intensive care nurses within the scope of evidence-based practices. It is recommended that meta-analysis studies be increased in postgraduate theses studies on kangaroo care in the field of nursing, and that qualitative research methods should also be used.