Intern culture, internal resistance: uptake of peer review in two Australian hospital internship programs

Factors influencing the development and implementation of nurse practitioner candidacy programs: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

To meet the growing needs of a diverse population, it is critical that healthcare service provision is underpinned by innovative, cost-effective, and sustainable services and solutions. The role of the nurse practitioner creates an opportunity to meet the increasing demands of complex care and enables greater access to high quality care. Understanding how best to support nurse practitioner candidates to develop into the nurse practitioner role will create greater opportunities to transform service delivery and improve healthcare outcomes.

AIM

To identify key factors that support and positively impact the implementation of nurse practitioner candidacy programs and candidate experiences.

METHODS

A scoping review of research and grey literature was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. For the research literature, eight electronic databases (Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, PubMed and PsycINFO) were searched followed by a hand search of the reference lists of published systematic reviews and relevant topical papers. A review of national and international grey literature sources was completed.

FINDINGS

Identification of a service gap, developing and promoting a clear role for the nurse practitioner candidate, integration into a multi-disciplinary team with strong mentorship/preceptorship support, continuing professional development, and evaluation of the program were identified as key factors in the research and grey literature.

CONCLUSION

A well-designed candidacy program can facilitate transition of the candidate into an autonomous, fully independent nurse practitioner. Recommendations to support the implementation of these roles into the clinical setting have been generated. Tweetable abstract: Key to nurse practitioner candidate programs: Identification of a service gap, clear role, integration, mentorship, training and evaluation.

Understanding how and why audits work in improving the quality of hospital care: A systematic realist review

BACKGROUND

Several types of audits have been used to promote quality improvement (QI) in hospital care. However, in-depth studies into the mechanisms responsible for the effectiveness of audits in a given context is scarce. We sought to understand the mechanisms and contextual factors that determine why audits might, or might not, lead to improved quality of hospital care.

METHODS

A realist review was conducted to systematically search and synthesise the literature on audits. Data from individual papers were synthesised by coding, iteratively testing and supplementing initial programme theories, and refining these theories into a set of context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs).

RESULTS

From our synthesis of 85 papers, seven CMOcs were identified that explain how audits work: (1) externally initiated audits create QI awareness although their impact on improvement diminishes over time; (2) a sense of urgency felt by healthcare professionals triggers engagement with an audit; (3) champions are vital for an audit to be perceived by healthcare professionals as worth the effort; (4) bottom-up initiated audits are more likely to bring about sustained change; (5) knowledge-sharing within externally mandated audits triggers participation by healthcare professionals; (6) audit data support healthcare professionals in raising issues in their dialogues with those in leadership positions; and (7) audits legitimise the provision of feedback to colleagues, which flattens the perceived hierarchy and encourages constructive collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

This realist review has identified seven CMOcs that should be taken into account when seeking to optimise the design and usage of audits. These CMOcs can provide policy makers and practice leaders with an adequate conceptual grounding to design contextually sensitive audits in diverse settings and advance the audit research agenda for various contexts.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42016039882.