Engaging Staff Nurses in Evidence at the Point of Care

Tuesday, November 3, 2009: 10:35 AM

Lisa English Long, MSN, RN
Patient Services - Center for Professional Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH
Myra Martz Huth, RN, PhD
Center for Professional Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH

Learning Objective 1: discuss strategies to engage clinical nurses in evidence-based practice.

Learning Objective 2: describe outcomes of staff involvement in an evidence program.

The importance of staff involved in evidence work supports the IOM report (2001) that clinical decisions be evidence based.  Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) empowers staff to address issues related to safety, cost and satisfaction within organizations. Identification of evidence may lead to practice changes or studies that improve patient and family outcomes. 

In today’s fast-paced healthcare environment, time for staff nurses to engage in EBP is limited or non-existent.  Staff involvement in evidence work requires scheduled time away from patient care.  Models exist that guide nurse’s involvement in evidence work (Cullen & Titler, 2004; Stevens, 2007; Schultz, 2005). Schultz’s model develops bedside nurse scholars who inquire, observe, analyze, synthesize evidence and data, apply evidence and evaluate subsequent outcomes (Fineout-Overholt et al., 2005).

Nursing leadership provides funding for the Point of Care Scholar (POCS) program.    Content for the POCS program includes EBP and research processes, EBP models, change theories, group formation, professional development and project completion.  All scholars receive one-on-one guidance with an EBP Mentor or Researcher.   Funding provides scholars protected time away from patient care. Unit directors are provided resources to fill the gap in patient care assignments when scholars attend program sessions.

Nine staff nurses have participated in the POCS program. Six projects are in the evidence synthesis stage. Three EBP projects have led to recommendations based on evidence; one project has evolved into a study. Two projects have been accepted for national presentations and two project teams are developing manuscripts. Future plans include mentoring two cohorts per year. Unit directors are being challenged to support the scholars continued engagement in sustaining evidence work.