Cargando…
Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership
BACKGROUND: The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8273989/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34253206 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00650-y |
_version_ | 1783721480226340864 |
---|---|
author | Vogel, Ruth G. M. Bours, Gerrie J. J. W. Rooijackers, Teuni H. Metzelthin, Silke F. Erkens, Petra M. G. van Rossum, Erik Zwakhalen, Sandra M. G. |
author_facet | Vogel, Ruth G. M. Bours, Gerrie J. J. W. Rooijackers, Teuni H. Metzelthin, Silke F. Erkens, Petra M. G. van Rossum, Erik Zwakhalen, Sandra M. G. |
author_sort | Vogel, Ruth G. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice. This article aims to describe the process evaluation of NitL. METHODS: A mixed-methods formative process evaluation with a predominantly qualitative approach was conducted. Qualitative data were collected by interviews with community nurses (n = 7), focus groups with team members (n = 31), and reviewing seven implementation plans and 28 patient records. Quantitative data were collected among community nurses and team members (N = 90) using a questionnaire to assess barriers in encouraging functional activities and attendance lists. Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS: NitL was largely executed according to plan. Points of attention were the use and value of the background theory within the training, completion of implementation plans, and reporting in patient records by community nurses. Inhibiting factors for showing leadership and encouraging functional activities were a lack of time and a high complexity of care; facilitating factors were structure and clear communication within teams. Nurses considered the systematic approach useful and the training educational for their role. Most team members considered NitL practical and were satisfied with the coaching provided by community nurses. To optimise NitL, community nurses recommended providing the training first and extending the training. The team members recommended continuing clinical lessons, which were an implementation strategy from the community nurses. CONCLUSIONS: NitL was largely executed as planned, and appears worthy of further application in community care practice. However, adaptations are recommended to make NitL more promising in practice in empowering community nurse leadership in implementing evidence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00650-y. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8273989 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82739892021-07-13 Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership Vogel, Ruth G. M. Bours, Gerrie J. J. W. Rooijackers, Teuni H. Metzelthin, Silke F. Erkens, Petra M. G. van Rossum, Erik Zwakhalen, Sandra M. G. BMC Nurs Research BACKGROUND: The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice. This article aims to describe the process evaluation of NitL. METHODS: A mixed-methods formative process evaluation with a predominantly qualitative approach was conducted. Qualitative data were collected by interviews with community nurses (n = 7), focus groups with team members (n = 31), and reviewing seven implementation plans and 28 patient records. Quantitative data were collected among community nurses and team members (N = 90) using a questionnaire to assess barriers in encouraging functional activities and attendance lists. Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS: NitL was largely executed according to plan. Points of attention were the use and value of the background theory within the training, completion of implementation plans, and reporting in patient records by community nurses. Inhibiting factors for showing leadership and encouraging functional activities were a lack of time and a high complexity of care; facilitating factors were structure and clear communication within teams. Nurses considered the systematic approach useful and the training educational for their role. Most team members considered NitL practical and were satisfied with the coaching provided by community nurses. To optimise NitL, community nurses recommended providing the training first and extending the training. The team members recommended continuing clinical lessons, which were an implementation strategy from the community nurses. CONCLUSIONS: NitL was largely executed as planned, and appears worthy of further application in community care practice. However, adaptations are recommended to make NitL more promising in practice in empowering community nurse leadership in implementing evidence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00650-y. BioMed Central 2021-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8273989/ /pubmed/34253206 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00650-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Vogel, Ruth G. M. Bours, Gerrie J. J. W. Rooijackers, Teuni H. Metzelthin, Silke F. Erkens, Petra M. G. van Rossum, Erik Zwakhalen, Sandra M. G. Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title | Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title_full | Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title_fullStr | Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title_full_unstemmed | Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title_short | Process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
title_sort | process evaluation of a programme to empower community nurse leadership |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8273989/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34253206 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00650-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vogelruthgm processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT boursgerriejjw processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT rooijackersteunih processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT metzelthinsilkef processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT erkenspetramg processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT vanrossumerik processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership AT zwakhalensandramg processevaluationofaprogrammetoempowercommunitynurseleadership |