1 / 18

A National Survey of Hospital Nursing Research Requirements and Outcomes *

A National Survey of Hospital Nursing Research Requirements and Outcomes *

neila
Download Presentation

A National Survey of Hospital Nursing Research Requirements and Outcomes *

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A National Survey of Hospital Nursing Research Requirements and Outcomes* 2012 National State of the Science Congress on Nursing Research Session Title: EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICESession Date, Time: September 14,2012  8:30 AM-10:00 AM Maureen McLaughlin PhD RN, Medstar Georgetown University HospitalKaren Gabel Speroni PhD RN, Inova Loudoun HospitalKathy Patterson Kelly PhD RN, Children’s National Medical CenterCathie E. Guzzetta PhD RN AHN-BC FAAN, Children’s National Medical CenterSameer DeSale, MS, Medstar Health Research InstituteAnnette Turner MSN RN, The Catholic University of America(*Washington Regional Nursing Research Consortium)

  2. Introduction/Background • Noted variable IRB policies regarding whether RNs can be PIs on RN-led research in the metropolitan Washington DC area hospitals • Such IRB requirements present a potential barrier to clinical nurses functioning as PIs of their studies in hospitals • Study investigators members of the Washington Regional Nursing Research Consortium (WRNRC)

  3. Purpose of Study/Research Questions • What are the hospital/IRB requirements for RN PIs: • RN education level & qualifications? • Nursing research mentoring processes? • Research education programs? • Nursing research review processes? • What are the scholarly outcomes of hospital-based research programs? • What are the facilitators and/or hindrances of RN-led research studies? • To identify hospital and/or IRB requirements for RN PIs to conduct RN-led research • To describe outcomes of hospital-based nursing research programs

  4. Methods • Descriptive, comparative national electronic survey of hospitals (purposive, convenience sample) • 798 hospitals from 3 groups: • 202 Magnet-designated • 195 Children’s Hospital Association (CHA) • 401 The Joint Commission (TJC) • HNRRO Survey: 60-item questionnaire; CVI = 1.0: • Educational & qualification requirements for nurse PIs • Nursing research mentoring process • Nursing research education & training • Nursing research peer-review process • Scholarly research outcomes • Facilitators and hindrances of RN-led research studies & research productivity (2 open-ended questions)

  5. Analysis • Quantitative: • Category fields: chi- square test & Fisher’s exact test • Continuous variables: t-test, ANOVA, Wilcoxon rank sum test, & Kruskal-Wallis test • Level of significance set at < 0.05 • Qualitative: • Conventional content analysis for 2 open-ended questions • Verbatim comments downloaded from electronic survey • 2 co-investigators worked with doctoral student to code data • Responses analyzed together & then divided into Magnet & non-Magnet hospital groups • Coding validated with 10% of dataset

  6. Results: Demographic Findings • 20% response rate • Total 160 returned surveys (Magnet & non-Magnet hospitals) • 66% (n= 106) Magnet hospitals • 34% (n= 54) Non-Magnet hospitals • Non-Magnet hospitals = 29 (18%) TJC & 25 (16%) CHA • Majority were not-for-profit & in urban areas • Magnet hospitals had > number of licensed beds & full-time equivalent RNs compared to non-Magnet hospitals (p<0.0001)

  7. Results: Educational Level & Qualifications Requirements for Nurse PIs • Only 8% (n=13) of hospitals had a minimum educational requirement to be a PI • More Magnet than non-Magnet hospitals had no minimum educational requirement (p=0.02) • 25% (n=36) of hospitals appointed a PI designee to sign IRB application if a RN did not meet IRB requirements to be a PI

  8. Results: Nursing Research Mentoring Process • Research mentors/leaders were available to guide nurses throughout the research process at the majority of hospitals (n=131, 83%) • More Magnet (n=103, 98%) than non-Magnet (n=28, 53%) hospitals had research mentors (p<0.0001)

  9. Results: Nursing Research Education & Training • 23% (n=37) required RN PIs to complete a research education course before conducting research • 21% (n=33) had research education classes available to their nurses • 20% (n=32) provided a nursing research internship/fellowship • Nearly all (97%) were expected to assume various roles in research at their hospital

  10. Results: Nursing Research Peer-Review Process • Majority had a Nursing Research Committee (NRC) (65%) or interdisciplinary research council (31%) • More Magnet (83%) than non-Magnet hospitals (30%) had a research council (p<0.0001) • Majority required NRC or other persons to review (84%) or approve (73%) the nursing research proposal before IRB submission • Majority required PI to report progress on study to research mentor (62%) or NRC (68%)

  11. Results:Research Program Scholarly Outcomes • Hospitals reported an annual total of 4 studies initiated, 4 disseminated (podium/poster), 1 published, & 2 funded • As hospital bed size increased, so did number of studies initiated (p=.03) • <100 beds = 1.95 studies • 101-200 beds = 2.76 studies • 201-300 = 2.94 studies • 301-500 = 3.61 studies • 501-700 = 4.42 studies • 701-1000 = 5.63 studies • >1000 = 6.4 studies

  12. Conclusion: Findings from this study provide a prototype & benchmark information for nursing administrators planning to establish, evaluate and/or expand nursing research programs

  13. Qualitative Results:Facilitators & Hindrances • 95% of surveys included written comments • 960 units of analysis • Facilitators • 477 Magnet, 107 non-Magnet • Hindrances • 279 Magnet, 97 non-Magnet • Total 24 codes (12 facilitator; 12 hindrance codes) • Commonly facilitator codes had mirror hindrance codes representing lack of the underlying construct (n=10 mirror constructs)

  14. Facilitator & Hindrance Codes with Magnet & non-Magnet Rank

  15. Limitations • Findings based on respondent’s familiarity with institutional work • Nursing research outcome data collected for years 2004-2008, other data provided in 2009 and/or 2010 • Findings likely overestimate influence of Magnet designation on nursing research in hospitals (66% our study vs 7% nation-wide)

  16. Expanded prototype forhospital-based nursing research program: Integration of quantitative & qualitative findings

  17. Implications • Nursing leaders need to partner with IRBs to create policies (e.g., mentor guidance, education, peer review) to ensure hospital-based RN researchers can be identified as PI & assume all responsibilities • Nursing leaders need to consider their hospital infrastructure, hospital culture, & components necessary for building a hospital-based nursing research program • Findings provide prototype for nursing leaders to guide development of a new nursing research program & provide benchmarks to evaluate and/or expand an existing program

  18. Contact Information Maureen McLaughlin, PhD, RN mmm116@gunet.georgetown.edu Karen Gabel Speroni, PhD, RN kgabelsperoni@smartneighborhood.net Katherine Patterson Kelly PhD RN kakelly@childrensnational.org Cathie E. Guzzetta, PhD, RN, AHN-BC, FAAN Cguzzett@childrensnational.org Sameer DeSale, MS Sameer.desale@medstar.net Annette Turner, MS, RN 03turner@cardinalmail.cua.edu

More Related