Clinical Nurse Specialists as Research Team Members

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
JANET S. FULTON
2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-202
Author(s):  
Julie S. Lampe ◽  
Patricia I. Geddie ◽  
Lillian Aguirre ◽  
Mary Lou Sole

Purpose and Background. The purpose of this article is to describe how clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) in one organization developed a structured interviewing process for CNS candidates. The process has evolved in relation to implementation of national CNS competencies, growth of the role in the organization, and changes to reporting structure. Outcomes. The CNS interview process includes panel interviews with various organizational leaders, CNSs, and team members. A behavioral-based tool relevant to the CNS role is used. Involving CNS peers in the interview ensures the successful hiring and retaining of suitable candidates. Clinical nurse specialists who were interviewed using the current peer interview procedure have reported satisfaction with the experience. Implications. Peer interviews for CNSs provide a forum for meaningful dialogue about the CNS role, competencies, and fit with the organization. This process can be used for other advanced practice disciplines.


2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Dave Hanson

Clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) work with and through other nurses as well as interprofessional team members to advance nursing practice, improve outcomes, and provide clinical expertise to effect system-wide changes to improve programs of care. They practice across the continuum and through 3 spheres of influence, encompassing the patient, nurse, and system. Clinical nurse specialists possess expertise in developing and refining structures, strategies, and processes to optimize outcomes at both the unit (micro) level and the organization or system (macro) level. This unique vantage point positions CNSs as ideal individuals to assume several key roles when a health care organization makes the decision to embark on the Magnet journey and to maintain Magnet recognition. The competence and competencies of CNSs and a health care organization’s desire to achieve and/or maintain Magnet recognition represent a synergistic match.


Pflege ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris Dörscheln ◽  
Raphael Lachetta ◽  
Michael Schulz ◽  
Doris Tacke

Lern- und köperbehinderte Menschen erfordern besondere Aufmerksamkeit und pflegerische Kompetenz während der stationären Behandlung. Es konnten 17 Publikationen für ein systematisches Review in den Datenbanken PUBMED, CINAHL und Cochrane Library (1990 – 2011) identifiziert werden. Dabei zeigten sich folgende Problemfelder: Die Situation lernbehinderter Menschen im Klinikalltag ist geprägt durch Kommunikationsbarrieren zwischen Patient(inn)en und professionellen Akteur(inn)en. Zudem dominiert die emotionale Situation lernbehinderter Menschen, die in der fremden Umgebung unter Angst und Unsicherheit leiden. Beide Phänomene stehen untereinander in Wechselwirkung und werden beeinflusst durch Bedingungen wie Zeit, Versorgungskontinuität, Fachkompetenz sowie die Einstellung behinderten Menschen gegenüber. Angehörige wirken beruhigend auf die Patient(inn)en ein und übernehmen die Aufgabe des Übersetzens im Klinikalltag. Clinical Nurse Specialists sind mit den Problemfeldern vertraut und tragen zu einer Verbesserung der Situation lern- und körperbehinderter Menschen im Krankenhaus bei. Die Studien weisen überwiegend eine kleine Stichprobe auf, die Ergebnisse bedürfen weiterer Überprüfungen. Empirische Erkenntnisse aus Deutschland, Österreich sowie der Schweiz liegen nicht vor. Aufgrund der auch hier zu erwartenden Problemlage sind empirische Forschungsarbeiten zu dieser Thematik somit dringend zu empfehlen. Der besondere prästationäre Informationsbedarf und das Einbeziehen Angehöriger in die stationäre Pflege sollten zukünftig berücksichtigt werden.


Author(s):  
Ruth Lowndes ◽  
Palle Storm ◽  
Marta Szebehely

This chapter discusses the taking, writing up, and analyzing of fieldnotes as part of the rapid ethnographic methodology. It describes the preparatory process the team members went through to learn how to conduct observations, and the guiding documents/principles used by the research team throughout the site visits. We explain how observations were carried out and how fieldnotes were captured in our project, comparing this process to that of traditional ethnographic research. It compares the process of writing up and analyzing fieldnotes in traditional ethnography with the process used in the team-based rapid ethnography, drawing on our individual experiences in conducting both types. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the strengths and limitations of the team-based approach.


Author(s):  
Erin Polka ◽  
Ellen Childs ◽  
Alexa Friedman ◽  
Kathryn S. Tomsho ◽  
Birgit Claus Henn ◽  
...  

Sharing individualized results with health study participants, a practice we and others refer to as “report-back,” ensures participant access to exposure and health information and may promote health equity. However, the practice of report-back and the content shared is often limited by the time-intensive process of personalizing reports. Software tools that automate creation of individualized reports have been built for specific studies, but are largely not open-source or broadly modifiable. We created an open-source and generalizable tool, called the Macro for the Compilation of Report-backs (MCR), to automate compilation of health study reports. We piloted MCR in two environmental exposure studies in Massachusetts, USA, and interviewed research team members (n = 7) about the impact of MCR on the report-back process. Researchers using MCR created more detailed reports than during manual report-back, including more individualized numerical, text, and graphical results. Using MCR, researchers saved time producing draft and final reports. Researchers also reported feeling more creative in the design process and more confident in report-back quality control. While MCR does not expedite the entire report-back process, we hope that this open-source tool reduces the barriers to personalizing health study reports, promotes more equitable access to individualized data, and advances self-determination among participants.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document