Search

Aims and Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare advanced practice in epilepsy nurses in Spain and United Kingdom, identifying differences in the domains of standard advanced practice., Background: Europe has recently faced the challenge of providing high-quality care for patients with epilepsy, a disease that generates many health demands. In some countries, such as the United Kingdom, advanced practice nursing is well established and could serve as a guide for implantation in countries where it is still in development, as is the case of Spain., Design: A multicentre cross-sectional descriptive cohort study compared differences in the roles of advanced practice nurses in Spain and the United Kingdom., Methods: The Advanced Practice Role Delineation Tool and its validated Spanish version were administered using an online questionnaire in a cohort of advanced practice epilepsy nurses in both countries. A convenience sample was recruited between January to December 2019. The study complied with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist., Results: Most United Kingdom nurses in our sample came from community environments, in contrast to Spanish nurses who worked in hospital. All domains analysed in the survey had significantly higher scores in the United Kingdom than in the Spanish cohort, especially in the research and leadership domains., Conclusions: The advanced practice role in Spain is underdeveloped compared with the United Kingdom. Differences in the settings of advanced roles in epilepsy nurses may be explained by greater community practice in the United Kingdom and differences in organisational and health systems., Relevance to Clinical Practice: Our study showed the need to implement specific policies to develop advance practice nurse roles in Spain to improve the quality of care of patients with epilepsy., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Advanced practice nursing (APN) roles offer improved access to care and increased quality and more timely care. Despite the advantages of APN roles, there is a disparity between European countries when it comes to implementing APN roles. Aim: To explore the implementation of APN roles in a range of European countries and to explore what factors facilitate or hinder the implementation of these roles. Methods: A case study evaluation of the process of implementing APN roles. The sample included four countries where APN roles were well developed (Ireland, Spain, Norway and the United Kingdom) and four where APN roles were implemented (Estonia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Romania). Interviews were conducted with key informants (n = 28) from government departments, regulatory bodies, nursing associations and universities. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (CPREQ) has been used throughout. Limitations: The small number of countries when considering the size of the region and key informants representing the view of only three to four people in each country. Results: Four themes were identified, including the rationale for the development of the roles, influence, the evolutionary nature of role development and evidence. The data also revealed a mismatch between the perceptions of how the roles develop among the different countries in the early stages of implementation. Conclusion: Successful role implementation is dependent upon a tripartite approach between managers, practitioners and educators. An evolutionary approach to role development was used. Regulation and policy come later on in the process of implementation. Implications for nursing policy: APN policy should be based on patient needs rather than on the workforce or professional imperatives. The process of implementation can take 15–20 years in total. Recognising the importance of the relationships between service managers and educators is key to the early development of these roles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]