Location
Virtual Conference
Start Date
27-6-2022 4:00 PM
End Date
27-6-2022 5:10 PM
Description
Background:
The American Nurse Credentialing Center’s (ANCC) Magnet® recognition promotes best patient outcomes and nurse practice environments within a healthcare organization and requires nurses to conduct research and disseminate findings. However, while undergraduate nursing programs recognize the need to provide research knowledge, current pre-licensure curriculum is not designed to engage students in research activities to foster competency in this skill. Despite research competencies endorsed by select national nursing organizations and the Magnet® designation requirements, RN competency levels for participating in research activities are reported to be suboptimal. Thus, best practice recommends a formal program to train and guide nurses in the research process.
Purpose: To measure the impact of a research basics course on self-reported nurse confidence and knowledge in research.
Approach:
Starting 2022, a “Research Basics 101” training course was offered to nurses working within one large health system. The hybrid course consisted of five online modules and one virtual 4-hour class. The five online modules lasted between 25-45 minutes each and the topics included: 1) Clinical Scholarship, 2) Finding and Evaluating the Evidence, 3) The Research Question, 4) Research Methods and 5) Data Collection and Analysis. The virtual class, offered monthly, focused on applying research principles from start to finish of a study. Nurses were asked to rate confidence on 13 aspects of the research process on a Likert scale ranging from not at all confident (0) to completely confident (4) at three time points: baseline (T1), post-online modules (T2), post-virtual class (T3). A total average score was calculated. Nurses also answered 15 knowledge questions with scores ranging from 0 to 18 points. Repeated measures ANOVAs tested differences in confidence and knowledge scores across the time points.
Results:
A total of 40 nurses participated in confidence evaluations at all three time points and 34 in knowledge evaluations. Of these, n=37 provided demographics. All regions in the health system were represented. Most nurses were patient facing (n=25, 69%) with an average of 14 years of experience. The number of days varied between T1-T2 (0-13 days, mean = 2) and T2-T3 (0-48 days, mean = 11.6). Overall, average confidence scores on the research process were rated as 1.8 at T1, 2.4 at T2, and 2.7 at T3, indicating significant improvement (p<0.001). The items with the greatest improvement included: “Interpreting statistical results from a research study”, and “Identifying an appropriate venue for disseminating study results.” On the knowledge exam, average scores significantly improved over time from 12.7 (T1), 14.4 (T2), to 14.8 (T3, p<0.001).
Conclusion:
This program evaluation affirms that research content significantly increased nursing confidence and knowledge in describing basic aspects of the research process. As a next step, participants will be contacted 180 days after completing the virtual class to determine involvement in new clinical inquiry projects.
Implications for practice:
Offering a hybrid research basics course to hospital-based nurses may increase confidence and understanding of the research process. With the application of these skills, nurses may impact care outcomes and support Magnet initiatives.
References:
American Organization for Nursing Leadership, 2015. Accessed from: AONL Nurse Executive Competencies on 12/14/2021
Wolters Kluwer. (2016). History of the Magnet® recognition program. https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/history-of-the-Magnet®-recognition-program
American Nurses Association. (n.d.). Magnet® model - Creating a Magnet® culture. American Nurses Credentialing Center
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2018). Position statement: Defining scholarship for academic nursing. https://www.aacnnursing.org/News-Information/Position-Statements-White-Papers/Defining-Scholarship-Nursinghttps://www.nursingworld.org/organizational-programs/Magnet®/Magnet®-model/
Cline, G. J., Burger, K. J., Amankwah, E. K., Goldenberg, N. A., & Ghazarian, S. R. (2017). Promoting the utilization of science in healthcare (push) project. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 33(3), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.1097/nnd.0000000000000345
Melnyk, B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Choy, K. (2016). A test of the ARCC© model improves implementation of evidence-based practice, healthcare culture, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(1), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12188
Wu, Y., Brettle, A., Zhou, C., Ou, J., Wang, Y., & Wang, S. (2018). Do educational interventions aimed at nurses to support the implementation of evidence-based practice improve patient outcomes? a systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 70, 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.026
Melnyk, B., Gallagher-Ford, L., Zellefrow, C., Tucker, S., Thomas, B., Sinnott, L. T., & Tan, A. (2017). The first U.S. study on nurses’ evidence-based practice competencies indicates major deficits that threaten healthcare quality, safety, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 15(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12269
Recommended Citation
Saul, Trisha and Bigand, Teresa, "Podium Presentation: Impact of a Research Basics Course on Hospital-Based Nursing Research Confidence Levels: A Program Evaluation" (2022). 2022 Providence Nurse Research Conference. 23.
https://digitalcommons.providence.org/prov_rn_conf_22/2022/day2/23
Included in
Podium Presentation: Impact of a Research Basics Course on Hospital-Based Nursing Research Confidence Levels: A Program Evaluation
Virtual Conference
Background:
The American Nurse Credentialing Center’s (ANCC) Magnet® recognition promotes best patient outcomes and nurse practice environments within a healthcare organization and requires nurses to conduct research and disseminate findings. However, while undergraduate nursing programs recognize the need to provide research knowledge, current pre-licensure curriculum is not designed to engage students in research activities to foster competency in this skill. Despite research competencies endorsed by select national nursing organizations and the Magnet® designation requirements, RN competency levels for participating in research activities are reported to be suboptimal. Thus, best practice recommends a formal program to train and guide nurses in the research process.
Purpose: To measure the impact of a research basics course on self-reported nurse confidence and knowledge in research.
Approach:
Starting 2022, a “Research Basics 101” training course was offered to nurses working within one large health system. The hybrid course consisted of five online modules and one virtual 4-hour class. The five online modules lasted between 25-45 minutes each and the topics included: 1) Clinical Scholarship, 2) Finding and Evaluating the Evidence, 3) The Research Question, 4) Research Methods and 5) Data Collection and Analysis. The virtual class, offered monthly, focused on applying research principles from start to finish of a study. Nurses were asked to rate confidence on 13 aspects of the research process on a Likert scale ranging from not at all confident (0) to completely confident (4) at three time points: baseline (T1), post-online modules (T2), post-virtual class (T3). A total average score was calculated. Nurses also answered 15 knowledge questions with scores ranging from 0 to 18 points. Repeated measures ANOVAs tested differences in confidence and knowledge scores across the time points.
Results:
A total of 40 nurses participated in confidence evaluations at all three time points and 34 in knowledge evaluations. Of these, n=37 provided demographics. All regions in the health system were represented. Most nurses were patient facing (n=25, 69%) with an average of 14 years of experience. The number of days varied between T1-T2 (0-13 days, mean = 2) and T2-T3 (0-48 days, mean = 11.6). Overall, average confidence scores on the research process were rated as 1.8 at T1, 2.4 at T2, and 2.7 at T3, indicating significant improvement (p<0.001). The items with the greatest improvement included: “Interpreting statistical results from a research study”, and “Identifying an appropriate venue for disseminating study results.” On the knowledge exam, average scores significantly improved over time from 12.7 (T1), 14.4 (T2), to 14.8 (T3, p<0.001).
Conclusion:
This program evaluation affirms that research content significantly increased nursing confidence and knowledge in describing basic aspects of the research process. As a next step, participants will be contacted 180 days after completing the virtual class to determine involvement in new clinical inquiry projects.
Implications for practice:
Offering a hybrid research basics course to hospital-based nurses may increase confidence and understanding of the research process. With the application of these skills, nurses may impact care outcomes and support Magnet initiatives.
References:
American Organization for Nursing Leadership, 2015. Accessed from: AONL Nurse Executive Competencies on 12/14/2021
Wolters Kluwer. (2016). History of the Magnet® recognition program. https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/history-of-the-Magnet®-recognition-program
American Nurses Association. (n.d.). Magnet® model - Creating a Magnet® culture. American Nurses Credentialing Center
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2018). Position statement: Defining scholarship for academic nursing. https://www.aacnnursing.org/News-Information/Position-Statements-White-Papers/Defining-Scholarship-Nursinghttps://www.nursingworld.org/organizational-programs/Magnet®/Magnet®-model/
Cline, G. J., Burger, K. J., Amankwah, E. K., Goldenberg, N. A., & Ghazarian, S. R. (2017). Promoting the utilization of science in healthcare (push) project. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 33(3), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.1097/nnd.0000000000000345
Melnyk, B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Choy, K. (2016). A test of the ARCC© model improves implementation of evidence-based practice, healthcare culture, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(1), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12188
Wu, Y., Brettle, A., Zhou, C., Ou, J., Wang, Y., & Wang, S. (2018). Do educational interventions aimed at nurses to support the implementation of evidence-based practice improve patient outcomes? a systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 70, 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.026
Melnyk, B., Gallagher-Ford, L., Zellefrow, C., Tucker, S., Thomas, B., Sinnott, L. T., & Tan, A. (2017). The first U.S. study on nurses’ evidence-based practice competencies indicates major deficits that threaten healthcare quality, safety, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 15(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12269
