2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/159888
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Clinical Nurse Specialist and Administrator Perceptions of CNS Practice
Abstract:
Clinical Nurse Specialist and Administrator Perceptions of CNS Practice
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2010
Author:Darmody, Julie, PhD, RN
P.I. Institution Name:University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Title:College of Nursing
Contact Address:PO Box 413, Milwaukee, WI, 53201-0413, USA
Contact Telephone:414-229-5558
Co-Authors:J.V. Darmody, College of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI;
The relationship between Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNSs) and the administrators who supervise and evaluate them can facilitate or constrain CNS practice within the organization. Limited information is available comparing the perceptions of CNSs and administrators about the most important activities and outcomes of CNS practice. Purpose: The purpose of this research was to compare CNS and Administrator perceptions of CNS practice in acute care settings. Theoretical/conceptual framework: According to the National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists (NACNS) model, CNSs influence patients, nurses, and the organization/system to promote quality, cost-effective outcomes for a specialty population. Subjects: CNS participants (n=30) and Administrator participants (n=7) were recruited from four health care organizations in the Midwestern United States. Method: Questionnaires were developed based on the literature and content review by experts. The CNS questionnaire included information about a) education and experience, b) current responsibilities, and c) perceptions about the most important activities and outcomes of their practice. The Administrator questionnaire included information about a) the nursing organization, b) CNSs employed, and c) perceptions about the most important activities and outcomes of CNS practice. Results: There was variability across organizations related to reporting relationships and the structure of CNS work. No significant differences were found when comparing CNS and Administrator perceptions of the importance of ten activities and seven outcomes. The most important CNS activities included developing clinical protocols and guidelines, quality improvement, and coordination of care. The most important outcomes included evidence-based nursing care and skilled and competent nursing staff. Conclusions: A positive finding in this study was the agreement of CNSs and Administrators about the most important CNS activities and outcomes. Agreement on the most important CNS activities and outcomes provides a foundation to facilitate priority setting, outcome measurement, and analysis of the effect of CNS practice on clinical and fiscal outcomes.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleClinical Nurse Specialist and Administrator Perceptions of CNS Practiceen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/159888-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Clinical Nurse Specialist and Administrator Perceptions of CNS Practice</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2010</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Darmody, Julie, PhD, RN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">College of Nursing</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">PO Box 413, Milwaukee, WI, 53201-0413, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">414-229-5558</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">darmodyj@uwm.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">J.V. Darmody, College of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI;</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">The relationship between Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNSs) and the administrators who supervise and evaluate them can facilitate or constrain CNS practice within the organization. Limited information is available comparing the perceptions of CNSs and administrators about the most important activities and outcomes of CNS practice. Purpose: The purpose of this research was to compare CNS and Administrator perceptions of CNS practice in acute care settings. Theoretical/conceptual framework: According to the National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists (NACNS) model, CNSs influence patients, nurses, and the organization/system to promote quality, cost-effective outcomes for a specialty population. Subjects: CNS participants (n=30) and Administrator participants (n=7) were recruited from four health care organizations in the Midwestern United States. Method: Questionnaires were developed based on the literature and content review by experts. The CNS questionnaire included information about a) education and experience, b) current responsibilities, and c) perceptions about the most important activities and outcomes of their practice. The Administrator questionnaire included information about a) the nursing organization, b) CNSs employed, and c) perceptions about the most important activities and outcomes of CNS practice. Results: There was variability across organizations related to reporting relationships and the structure of CNS work. No significant differences were found when comparing CNS and Administrator perceptions of the importance of ten activities and seven outcomes. The most important CNS activities included developing clinical protocols and guidelines, quality improvement, and coordination of care. The most important outcomes included evidence-based nursing care and skilled and competent nursing staff. Conclusions: A positive finding in this study was the agreement of CNSs and Administrators about the most important CNS activities and outcomes. Agreement on the most important CNS activities and outcomes provides a foundation to facilitate priority setting, outcome measurement, and analysis of the effect of CNS practice on clinical and fiscal outcomes.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T22:25:42Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T22:25:42Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.