Search

Aim: To identify and synthesize research on the awareness, attitudes and action related to sustainability and climate change from the perspective of nursing students and educators globally. Design: Integrative review. Methods: The review was guided by Whittemore and Knafl. Included studies were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A deductive content analysis based on Elo and Kyngäs' methodology was employed. Data Sources: CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, British Education Index, GreenFILE and Scopus were searched up to the 8th November 2022. Results: Thirty‐two studies were included in the review. Two studies included nursing educators in their samples, the rest focused solely on students. Findings suggest that whilst some students were aware of sustainability issues and felt that nurses have a responsibility to mitigate climate change, others showed limited awareness and believed that nurses have more important priorities. A global interest was seen among students for increased curricular content related to sustainability and climate change. Waste management and education of others were suggested actions students can take; however, barriers included lack of confidence and limited power. Conclusion: There is a need for sustainability education within nursing curricula, accompanied by student support. Implications for the Profession: The review acts as a starting point to make sustainable healthcare and climate change mitigation integral aspects of nursing. Impact: Sustainability education within nursing curricula can positively impact on sustainable healthcare and climate change mitigation. More research is needed on the perspectives of nursing educators. Reporting Method: The review is reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims The aims of this paper are to: (1) describe work characteristics that nurse faculty report encourage them to remain in or leave their academic positions; and (2) determine if there are generational differences in work characteristics selected. Background Nurse faculty play key roles in preparing new nurses and graduate nurses. However, educational institutions are challenged to maintain full employment in faculty positions. Design A cross-sectional, descriptive survey design was employed. Methods Ontario nurse faculty were asked to select, from a list, work characteristics that entice them to remain in or leave their faculty positions. Respondent data ( n = 650) were collected using mailed surveys over four months in 2011. Results While preferred work characteristics differed across generations, the most frequently selected incentives enticing nurse faculty to stay were having: a supportive director/dean, reasonable workloads, supportive colleagues, adequate resources, manageable class sizes and work/life balance. The most frequently selected disincentives included: unmanageable workloads, unsupportive organizations, poor work environments, exposure to bullying, belittling and other types of incivility in the workplace and having an unsupportive director/dean. Conclusion This research yields new and important knowledge about work characteristics that nurse faculty report shape their decisions to remain in or leave their current employment. Certain work characteristics were rated as important among all generations. Where similarities exist, broad strategies addressing work characteristics may effectively promote nurse faculty retention. However, where generational differences exist, retention-promoting strategies should target generation-specific preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This study aimed to compare the findings of the quality of nursing doctoral education survey across seven countries and discuss the strategic directions for improving quality. Background No comparative evaluation of global quality of nursing doctoral education has been reported to date despite the rapid increase in the number of nursing doctoral programmes. Design A descriptive, cross-country, comparative design was employed. Methods Data were collected from 2007-2010 from nursing schools in seven countries: Australia, Japan, Korea, South Africa, Thailand, UK and USA. An online questionnaire was used to evaluate quality of nursing doctoral education except for Japan, where a paper version was used. Korea and South Africa used e-mails quality of nursing doctoral education was evaluated using four domains: Programme, Faculty (referring to academic staff), Resource and Evaluation. Descriptive statistics, correlational and ordinal logistic regression were employed. Results A total of 105 deans/schools, 414 faculty and 1149 students/graduates participated. The perceptions of faculty and students/graduates about the quality of nursing doctoral education across the seven countries were mostly favourable on all four domains. The faculty domain score had the largest estimated coefficient for relative importance. As the overall quality level of doctoral education rose from fair to good, the resource domain showed an increased effect. Conclusions Both faculty and students/graduates groups rated the overall quality of nursing doctoral education favourably. The faculty domain had the greatest importance for quality, followed by the programme domain. However, the importance of the resource domain gained significance as the overall quality of nursing doctoral education increased, indicating the needs for more attention to resources if the quality of nursing doctoral education is to improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Aim: To develop a critical thinking assessment tool for Australian undergraduate nurses. Background: Critical thinking is an important skill but difficult to assess in nursing practice. There are often many responses a nurse can make to a clinical problem or situation. Some responses are more correct than others and these decisions have an impact on a patient's care and safety. Differences in a response can relate to the depth of knowledge, experience and critical thinking ability of the individual nurse. Design: This study used a Delphi process to develop five clinical case studies together with the most appropriate clinical responses to 25 clinical questions. Method: The Delphi technique was undertaken using the Qualtrics survey tool between October 2016–January 2017. A panel of 13 nursing experts from various geographical locations in Australia participated in the study to review the case scenarios and answers to questions posed. Four rounds of participation were required to achieve a minimum of 80% agreement between participants. Participants were asked to rank answers for 25 multi‐choice questions based on the correct nursing management of case scenarios provided and provide feedback as to the accuracy and relevance of the scenarios and answers. Results: Four rounds of Delphi questions were required to reach consensus on the correct wording and answers for the scenarios. Five case studies have been developed with nursing responses to patient management in rank order from most correct to least correct. Conclusion: Use of the tool should provide confidence that a nurse has met a certain level of critical thinking ability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim The aim of this study was to explore and compare the experiences of nurses in Australia and the UK as they moved from clinical practice into higher education institutions. Background When nurse education moved from hospitals into higher education institutions, the roles and career pathways of nurse educators changed. Design The design method used in this study was qualitative interview study. Methods Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 14 nurse educators, seven in Australia and seven in the UK, in 2011-2012. Thematic analysis of the transcripts was undertaken and triangulated with automated content and thematic analysis by Leximancer© software. Findings Nurse academics in Australia and the UK voiced similar enthusiasms and concerns. These coalesced around four emergent themes: adapting to change, external pressures, teaching and progress up the academic ladder. The Leximancer© analysis for both sites ranked 'research' as the primary theme, linked with 'time', 'University' and 'nursing' on both sites. Respondents were aware of the importance of research to career progression in universities, but most prioritized their teaching and clinical commitments for the sake of their organizations. Most respondents were supported in their doctoral studies, but the absence of postdoctoral research teams, mentors and role models was striking. Conclusion Additional support is needed to ensure that nurse academics are able to pursue research beyond doctoral level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]