Search

Aim: The aim of the study was to identify the nature and extent of scientific research addressing continuing education for advanced practice nurses. Design: A scoping review. Review Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. Data Sources: Electronic search was conducted on 17 September 2023 via CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Joanna Briggs Institute's Evidence‐Based Practice Database for research articles published between 2012 and 2023. Results: Nineteen papers were included in this review. Scientific research on continuing education for advanced practice nursing roles (i.e. nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist) has primarily been conducted in the United States and mostly addresses online‐delivered continuing education interventions for clinical care competency. Most of the interventions targeted nurse practitioners. Conclusion: Continuing education has a pivotal role in supporting advanced practice nursing competency development. In addition to clinical care, future continuing education research should focus on other advanced practice nursing competencies, such as education, leadership, supporting organizational strategies, research and evidence implementation. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Continuing education programmes for advanced practice nurses should be rigorously developed, implemented and evaluated to support the quality and effectiveness of patient care. Impact: Continuing education for advanced practice nursing roles is an understudied phenomenon. This review highlights future research priorities and may inform the development of continuing education programmes. Reporting Method: PRISMA‐ScR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To report the results of a mapping exercise by the European Federation of Nurses on current advanced practice nursing frameworks and developments across Europe. Design: Online, cross‐sectional, questionnaire study. Methods: An online questionnaire was distributed among 35 national nurses' associations across Europe in March 2021. The questionnaire solicited input on 60 items concerning key features of advanced practice nursing, intending to map existing developments and better understand the current state of advanced practice nursing in Europe. Data analysis used descriptive statistics, including counts and percentages, tabulation; open‐text responses were handled with thematic synthesis techniques. Results: The definition, sense‐making and operationalization of advanced practice nursing vary across Europe. Important variations were noted in the definition and requirements of advanced practice nursing, resulting in different views on the competencies and scope of practice associated with this role. Importantly, the level of education and training required to qualify and practice as an advanced practice nurse varies across European countries. Furthermore, only 11 countries reported the existence of a national legislation establishing minimum educational requirements. Conclusion: Significant variation exists in how countries define advanced practice nursing and how it is regulated at academic and practice levels. More research is needed to clarify whether this variation results from designing models of advanced practice nursing that work in different contexts; and what impact a standardized regulatory framework could have to grow the volume of advanced practice nurses across Europe. Impact: The current paper exposes the lack of clarity on the development and implementation of advanced practice nursing across Europe. We found significant variation in the definition, recognition, regulation and education of advanced practice nurses. Our data are essential to policymakers, professional associations and employers to ensure a coordinated and systematic effort in the consistency and ongoing development of advanced practice nurses across Europe. Patient or Public Contribution: No patient or public contribution applied; the participants were national nurses' associations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aims of the study were to describe the processes used to introduce advanced practice nursing roles and factors that facilitated or hindered role implementation, examine the time advanced practice nurses (APNs) spend in role activities and how these activities relate to domains of advanced practice nursing and examine how implementation processes influenced APN integration within healthcare teams. Design: A multiple case study was conducted. Methods: Five cases were included, representing the four population areas approved for advanced practice nursing in France. Data were collected from January to March 2021 using observation, interview and document analysis methods. Data were examined using thematic analysis. Results: Participants included APNs (n = 5), nurses/allied health providers (n = 5), physicians (n = 5), managers (n = 4) and decision-makers (n = 4). Stakeholder engagement and leadership provided by decision-makers, managers, physicians and APNs facilitated role implementation. Poor stakeholder role understanding, uncertain role funding, and the COVID-19 pandemic hindered role implementation. APNs spent the most time in clinical activities. Participants perceived the integration of APNs within the healthcare team and their impact on patient care to be positive. Conclusion: Stakeholder engagement and organizational and APN leadership facilitated the implementation of the roles, especially related to team-based patient care. Further efforts are needed to strengthen APN involvement in non-clinical activities and address role barriers. Implications for nursing and patient care: Systematic and system-wide approaches are needed to improve role clarity, role autonomy and health systems integration of APNs. Research should examine patient perspectives about APNs in France. Impact: The results highlight how policies can create favourable conditions for advanced practice nursing role implementation in France. Internationally, this study serves as a reminder to APNs and nurse leaders about the strategies for and importance of implementation evaluation to support the optimal development of advanced practice nursing roles. Reporting Method: The study reporting followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. Patient or Public Contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To identify the roles and activities of nurses, including advanced practice nursing (APN), and to determine nursing practice patterns across health facilities in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A descriptive cross‐sectional design was used to collect data from 207 nurses working in the Saudi health sector between November 2021 and March 2022 through an online questionnaire. The Advanced Practice Role Delineation tool was used to measure and delineate nursing practice patterns and activities. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. The study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology reporting guidelines. Results: Findings showed that participants, regardless of their current role, reported high scores across all domains of practice. The highest average score was obtained for the Clinical Care domain. Except for the leadership domain, findings showed that those reported working as advanced practice nurses had higher average scores across all domains than those working as staff nurses or being in managerial/administrative positions. There were significant differences in the average Clinical Care scores between advanced practice nurses and staff nurses. Conclusion: Advanced practice nursing roles and activities are being practised in Saudi Arabia; however, there is no clear delineation of these roles and activities according to a unified and national‐level APN scope of practice. Impacts: Advanced practice nursing roles are evolving in Saudi Arabia; however, no study has examined the existing patterns of APN activities in Saudi Arabia. This study highlights the practice patterns of advanced practice nurses and adds to the international evidence base on the need for delineating APN activities under a unified scope of practice. The findings of this study are beneficial to practitioners, researchers, and stakeholders as well as the legislative and regulatory bodies. Patient or public contribution: No patient or public contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]