Paper
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
This presentation is part of : Strategies to Create Evidence-Based Nursing Environments
Scholarship for the Discipline of Nursing: A Shared Strategic Approach to Evidence-Based Nursing
Donna M. Kubesh, RN, PhD, Department of Nursing, Luther College, Decorah, IA, USA and Marcelline Harris, RN, PhD, Nursing and Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Learning Objective #1: Describe methods for the development of collaborative evidence-based practice processes between academia and practice
Learning Objective #2: Identify ways for expanding scholarship through collaboration between academia and practice

This paper will describe how a strategic focus on scholarship enabled collaboration between academia and service in order advance the goals of evidence-based practice (EBP).

Background: Achieving the goals of EBP for improved health outcomes requires collaborations among academia and service. However there is limited discussion around how such collaborations fit into role expectations within specific employment settings. The AACN position statement on scholarship focuses on aspects of scholarship relevant to academic nursing. Both the STTI clinical scholarship paper and the 2003 Magnet Program for hospitals speak broadly to external collaborations without specifying what that might look like. If nursing is to fully leverage the strength of the discipline around improved health outcomes, a shared strategy supporting collaboration in EBP is essential.

Methods: Nurses in service first reviewed EBP models to identify key components and to formalize an implementation strategy. Potential contributions of academicians were then examined in relation to EBP components, and compared to aspects of scholarship. Literature was reviewed to determine aspects of scholarship for clinicians. Leadership and management strategies to create environments that facilitate and reward collaborations around EBP were considered for both settings.

Findings: First, the absence of a unified conceptual model of EBP limits identification of key areas for collaboration. Second, the literature around collaborations for EBP is extremely limited. Third, measures of quality in areas of scholarship related to EBP are specified for academia, but not described for service. Finally, although nurses in both academia and service need to attend to all components of EBP, a differentiation of emphasis germane to different employment settings is evident when EBP is considered as an expression of scholarship.

Implications: Framing EBP strategies around dimensions of scholarship for the discipline provides a framework for fruitful discussion around a strategy for collaboration between academia and service.

Back to Strategies to Create Evidence-Based Nursing Environments
Back to Evidence-Based Nursing: Strategies for Improving Practice
Sigma Theta Tau International
July 21, 2004