Exploring the necessity of establishing a doctor of nursing practice program from experts' views: a qualitative study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Complex healthcare systems increasingly demand influential nurse leaders adept at managing changes in unstable environments. The doctor of nursing practice (DNP) prepares the nurses for the most advanced level of clinical practice. The aim of this study was to explore the necessity of establishing a DNP program in Iran from experts' views.Methods
The study used a qualitative descriptive approach. The participants consisted of 13 faculty members and Ph.D. candidates selected using purposive sampling. Data were collected through focus group and semi-structured interviews, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis.Results
The content analysis led to the extraction of two main categories: "providing infrastructures" and "DNP as an opportunity to make positive outcomes."Conclusions
It is concluded that it is not necessary to establish a DNP program for Iran's nursing education system. Supplying infrastructures is a crucial component to establishing a new program in Iran. Although DNP, as an opportunity to drive positive changes, is recommended, in the current situation, using alternative solutions may yield better outcomes than establishing a DNP program.
SUBMITTER: Rivaz M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8183583 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundGene drive technologies (GDTs) promote the rapid spread of a particular genetic element within a population of non-human organisms. Potential applications of GDTs include the control of insect vectors, invasive species and agricultural pests. Whether, and if so, under what conditions, GDTs should be deployed is hotly debated. Although broad stances in this debate have been described, the convictions that inform the moral views of the experts shaping these technologies and related policies have not been examined in depth in the academic literature.MethodsIn this qualitative study, we interviewed GDT experts (n?=?33) from different disciplines to identify and better understand their moral views regarding these technologies. The pseudonymized transcripts were analyzed thematically.ResultsThe respondents' moral views were principally influenced by their attitudes towards (1) the uncertainty related to GDTs; (2) the alternatives to which they should be compared; and (3) the role humans should have in nature. Respondents agreed there is epistemic uncertainty related to GDTs, identified similar knowledge gaps, and stressed the importance of realistic expectations in discussions on GDTs. They disagreed about whether uncertainty provides a rationale to refrain from field trials ('risks of intervention' stance) or to proceed with phased testing to obtain more knowledge given the harms of the status quo ('risks of non-intervention' stance). With regards to alternatives to tackle vector-borne diseases, invasive species and agricultural pests, respondents disagreed about which alternatives should be considered (un)feasible and (in)sufficiently explored: conventional strategies ('downstream solutions' stance) or systematic changes to health care, political and agricultural systems ('upstream solutions' stance). Finally, respondents held different views on nature and whether the use of GDTs is compatible with humans' role in nature ('interference' stance) or not ('non-interference stance').ConclusionsThis interview study helps to disentangle the debate on GDTs by providing a better understanding of the moral views of GDT experts. The obtained insights provide valuable stepping-stones for a constructive debate about underlying value conflicts and call attention to topics that deserve further (normative) reflection. Further evaluation of these issues can facilitate the debate on and responsible development of GDTs.
| S-EPMC7938529 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundKetamine is a new and promising treatment for depression but comes with challenges to implement because of its potential for abuse.AimsWe sought the views of patients to inform policy and practical decisions about the clinical use of ketamine before large-scale roll-out is considered.MethodThis qualitative study used three focus groups and three validation sessions from 14 patients with prior diagnoses of depression but no experience of ketamine treatment. Focus groups explored their views about clinical use of ketamine and the best way for ketamine to be administered and monitored. The qualitative data were analysed by three service-user researchers using thematic analysis.ResultsFive themes were generated: changing public perceptions, risks, monitoring, privacy and data protection, and practical aspects. Participants were conscious of the stigma attached to ketamine as a street drug and wanted better public education, and evidence on the safety of ketamine after long-term use. They felt that monitoring was required to provide evidence for ketamine's safe use and administration, but there were concerns about the misuse of this information. Practical aspects included discussions about treatment duration, administration and accessibility (for example who would receive it, under what criteria and how).ConclusionsPatients are enthusiastic about ketamine treatment but need more information before national roll-out. The wider societal impact of ketamine treatment also needs to be considered and patients need to be part of any future roll-out to ensure its success.
| S-EPMC8058884 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe U.S. clinical research enterprise in nursing homes was unprepared to mount clinical trials in nursing homes to address urgent questions relevant to prevention and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. We identify priorities essential for establishing a supportive environment for future clinical trials in nursing homes.MethodsTwo cross-sectional online questionnaires were administered between January and February 2021. One was administered to nursing home providers, researchers, and policymakers; respondents rated the importance of attributes of researchers, facilities, leaders and staff for conducting clinical trials in nursing homes. Because importance may depend on trial type, respondents rated each attribute for efficacy trials (testing an intervention in ideal circumstances) and effectiveness trials (testing an intervention in "real world" circumstances). We calculated the attribute rating means and standard deviations, and used content analysis to characterize open-ended responses. The second questionnaire for resident family members and advocates included open-ended questions about nursing home research, and factors influencing willingness to participate.ResultsThe attributes rated as most essential for conducting efficacy and effectiveness trials in nursing homes are research team attributes, that is, that researchers recognize regulatory constraints; understand and adapt to nursing home workflow; and work collaboratively with nursing home leaders to identify priorities. Resident and facility diversity emerged as essential for effectiveness trials; important dimensions included resident race, ethnicity and income, as well as nursing home urban/rural location, quality ratings, geography, staffing ratios, size, and profit status. Caregivers and resident advocates stressed the importance of communication among participants, researchers, and nursing home leadership and staff at all stages of a trial.ConclusionDeveloping a robust U.S. clinical research enterprise capable of efficiently mounting future clinical trials in nursing homes will require a reimagining of the relationships that exist between researchers, facilities, nursing home leaders, and residents, with a research infrastructure specifically focused on supporting and fostering these connections.
| S-EPMC8986625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to explore factors that motivate students to engage in skills practice in a laboratory setting, and to identify their motivation types and the regulatory styles.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 nursing students from three universities between November 2017 and January 2018. A thematic analysis was used to identify factors associated with students' motivation to engage in skills practice in a laboratory. The types and the regulatory styles of student motivation were identified based on the self-determination theory.ResultsSeven motivating factors were identified. These factors included the students' desire "to acquire the skills necessary to work as a nurse", the "desire to improve skills in preparation for clinical practicum", and their felt "obligations to patients as a nurse". Moreover, "the impetus to study arising from the objective evaluation of oneself and others" and "wanting to pass the skills examination" motivated the students to engage in skills practice. A "learning environment that facilitates students' learning" and the "supportive involvement of educators" facilitated their learning. Based on the self-determination theory, the students were found to embrace extrinsic motivation with four regulatory styles of motivation, namely integrated, identified, introjected, and external regulation.ConclusionsNurse educators should understand the motivating factors of students, and help students embrace a more internally controlled motivation by helping them envision their future careers as nurses, and by fostering their ethical duty to care for patients.
| S-EPMC7859546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Developments in enzyme replacement therapy have kindled discussions on adding Pompe disease, characterized by progressive muscle weakness and wasting, to neonatal screening. Pompe disease does not fit traditional screening criteria as it is a broad-spectrum phenotype disorder that may occur in lethal form in early infancy or manifest in less severe forms from infancy to late adulthood. Current screening tests cannot differentiate between these forms. Normally, expanding screening is discussed among experts in advisory bodies. While advisory reports usually mention the procedures and outcome of deliberations, little is known of the importance attached to different arguments and the actual weighing processes involved. In this research we aim to explore the views of a wide range of relevant professionals to gain more insight into the process of weighing pros and cons of neonatal screening for Pompe disease, as an example of the dilemmas involved in screening for broad-spectrum phenotype disorders. METHODS: We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with medical, lab, insurance and screening professionals, and executive staff of patient organisations. They were asked about their first reaction to neonatal screening for Pompe disease, after which benefits and harms and requirements for screening were explored in more detail. RESULTS: Advantages included health gain by timely intervention, avoiding a diagnostic quest, having a reproductive choice and gaining more knowledge about the natural course and treatment. Being prepared was mentioned as an advantage for the later manifesting cases. Disadvantages included treatment costs and uncertainties about its effect, the timing of treatment in later manifesting cases, the psychological burden for the patient-in-waiting and the family. Also the downsides of having prior knowledge as well as having to consider a reproductive option were mentioned as disadvantages. CONCLUSION: When weighing pros and cons, interviewees attach different importance to different arguments, based on personal and professional views. Professionals expect benefits from neonatal screening for Pompe disease, especially for early-onset cases. Some interviewees valued screening in later manifesting cases as well, while stressing the need for adequate support of pre-symptomatic patients and their families. Others considered the psychological burden and uncertainties regarding treatment as reasons not to screen.
| S-EPMC4139142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMedical students show a relatively high prevalence for common mental disorders. Only few of those in need for treatment seek professional help. Therefore, easily accessible interventions are required. While several evidence-based internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) have been proposed, little is known about medical students' attitudes towards using them.ObjectiveWe aimed to explore the views of medical students on IMIs as well as facilitators and barriers to use them and gain first insights into their preferences for tailored IMIs.MethodsWe conducted four focus groups with 26 medical students enrolled at a German medical school in March 2020. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed following established approaches for qualitative content analysis.ResultsMedical students valued IMIs for their low-threshold and flexible access, their potential to bridge waiting times and as a first step towards face-to-face-therapy. However, medical students preferred face-to-face interventions in case of severe mental health problems. The main disadvantages named by students included difficulties to find or decide on suitable IMIs based on clear quality criteria, fear of a misdiagnosis and lack of personalisation and human interaction. Some students also questioned the effectiveness of IMIs. Easy handling, flexible use, data safety and easily understandable terms of use were believed to facilitate the uptake of IMIs, whereas technical problems, frequent notifications, required internet access, need to register, lack of anonymity, high time expenditure and costs were reported to hinder their use. Most students did not prefer IMIs tailored to medical students but rather wanted to use IMIs suitable for students of all disciplines.ConclusionOur results suggest overall positive views regarding IMIs for mental health promotion but concerns regarding their use for severe mental disorders and acute crises. Our findings indicate that IMIs may represent promising tools for stress prevention and early interventions for medical students. Students explicitly stated to prefer quality-approved IMIs recommended and provided by their university.
| S-EPMC8122007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2004, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) called for all nursing schools to phase out master's-level preparation for advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) and transition to doctor of nursing practice (DNP) preparation only by 2015. Today, five years after the AACN's deadline, nursing has not yet adopted a universal DNP standard for APRN practice entry. PURPOSE:The purpose of this paper is to examine the factors influencing the ability of nursing schools to implement a universal DNP standard for APRNs. METHODS:Deans from top-ranked nursing schools explore the current state of the DNP degree in the US. The authors draw upon their collective experience as national leaders in academic nursing, long-time influencers on this debate, and heads of DNP programs themselves. This insight is combined with a synthesis of the literature and analysis of previously unpublished data from the AACN on trends in nursing doctoral education. FINDINGS:This paper highlights issues such as the long history of inconsistency (in messaging, curricula, etc.) surrounding the DNP, certification and accreditation challenges, cost barriers, and more. The authors apply COVID-19 as a case study to help place DNP graduates within a real-world context for health system stakeholders whose buy-in is essential for the success of this professional transition. DISCUSSION:This paper describes the DNP's standing in today's professional environment and advances the conversation on key barriers to its adoption. Insights are shared regarding critical next steps to ensure national acceptance of the DNP as nursing's terminal practice degree.
| S-EPMC7161484 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo identify and follow-up on the transition towards differentiated nursing practice among bachelor trained and vocationally trained nurses in Dutch hospitals.DesignA multiphase general qualitative interview study.MethodsFifty semi-structured interviews with project managers in charge of introducing differentiated nursing practice to their hospital were conducted. Purposive sampling was used, and data were collected in 2017, 2019 and 2020. A meta-analysis was conducted after independent primary thematic analysis of each data collection.ResultsThe introduction of differentiated nursing practice to Dutch hospitals was perceived as uncertain and ambiguous. Three themes were identified during the transition towards differentiated nursing practice: (1) call to action; (2) sitting and waiting; and (3) new beginnings and open ends. The change to differentiated nursing practice is not straightforward and these findings highlight the emerging awareness among project managers of the nature and complexity of the transition. During the study period, professionalization of the nursing profession was recognized as fundamental in hospital organizations.ConclusionNursing cannot be separated from differentiated nursing practice. Visible leadership is important at all organizational levels and nurses' opinions must be considered as nurses are essential to such changes in healthcare.ImpactDifferentiated nursing practice based on nursing education allows nurses to make the best use of their experience, skills and competencies, and could promote the provision of effective and high-quality patient care. However, in many cases, a nurse's practice role is based on their nursing licensure instead of their educational background. The change to differentiated nursing practice in hospitals is not straightforward and the nature and complexity of the transition needs to be acknowledged. Nurses have an important role in healthcare transformation and need to be active in developing and formulating rather than just implementing the changes.
| S-EPMC9292649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) developed the Fellowship and Residency Research Program (FRRP) to provide residents and clinical fellows with a supervised and structured research experience. The objective of this study was to explore the views of FRRP participants about the training program and how to enhance it.MethodsIn 2018, we conducted a qualitative study targeting residents where we invited potential participants through email and via snowball sampling. We continued the data collection until we reached data saturation with 21 participants (N = 21) and used thematic analysis to identify emerging themes.ResultsThematic analysis generated four emerging themes: one related to the expectations of residents, while the remaining three themes related to how the program is working to meet those expectations, specifically: coordination, mentorship, and capacity building. For these three latter themes, we discussed the strengths and challenges related to each. In terms of coordination, few residents complained that the deadlines to submit deliverables are not evenly distributed across the years. In terms of mentorship, participants appreciated the flexibility in choosing the mentor. In terms of capacity building activities, participants found the lecture series, both real time and virtual, to be helpful. Finally, participants pointed out that the FRRP program should be mandatory.DiscussionTo provide residents and clinical fellows with a supervised and structured research experience, we have built on our findings to introduce several changes to our program such as ensuring the availability and commitment of faculty mentors, and providing capacity building activities to the program participants.
| S-EPMC8782500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The presence of intensive livestock farms in close vicinity to residential areas in the Netherlands is a complex problem characterised by knowledge uncertainty about the effects on residential health, overlapping value-driven concerns and stakeholder diversity. In order to address concerns about the health effects and effectively manage the debate about intensive livestock farming, constructive stakeholder dialogues are encouraged, informed by current scientific insights. We explored the current knowledge, beliefs and concerns of scientific experts, following the mental models approach. A summary expert model was derived from scanning the relevant literature and informed by interviews with 20 scientific experts. The study shows imprecise use of terminology by experts. Moreover, they appear to perceive intensive livestock farming not as a major health problem at least at this moment for neighbouring residents in the Netherlands. Broader themes such as (environmental) unsustainability and biodiversity loss seem a more prominent concern among the experts. Our study questions whether dialogues should only focus on residential health or cover broader values and concerns. However, mental models about risk may differ with other stakeholders, impeding communication. Hence, we will identify other stakeholders' knowledge, beliefs and value-based concerns in the light of facilitating constructed dialogues between stakeholders.
| S-EPMC6801788 | biostudies-literature