Monday, 31 October 2011
Kenn M. Kirksey, RN, PhD, ACNS-BC
Center for Nursing Research, Seton Family of Hospitals, Austin, TX
Joyce A. Batcheller, DNP, RN, NEA-BC, FAAN
Nursing Administration, Seton Family of Hospitals, Austin, TX
Yvonne M. VanDyke, MSN, RN
Clinical Education Center, Seton Family of Hospitals, Austin, TX
Myrna L. Armstrong, RN, EdD, FAAN
School of Nursing, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center - retired, Marble Falls, TX
Learning Objective 1: The learner will be able to identify key steps in implementing a bi-institutional collaboration to support nurses in writing for publication.
Learning Objective 2: The learner will be able to describe the importance of sharing innovations in nursing practice, education, administration and research through refereed publications.
Background: Styles (1978) noted “the primary reason to publish is because the future of the profession depends on it.” Hospital-based nurses are well positioned to promote innovative practice by engaging in new ways of thinking, creating, and disseminating their ideas. “Publish or perish” has long been expected of academicians; however, there has been a paucity of encouragement and support for nurses employed in clinical settings to write for publication. Yet, it provides a forum for both leaders and direct care providers to share advances in clinical practice, leadership, education and science. Implementation of delivery of care models (e.g., Transforming Care at the Bedside), incorporation of innovative educational pedagogies (e.g., Versant RN Residency), and translation of newly created or existing data are just a few ways nurses can assist in enhancing client outcomes, informing policy development, and contributing to nursing knowledge.
Methods: Two workshop and multiple individual mentoring sessions were offered through a collaborative university and hospital-based faculty partnership to 20 clinically-based nurses representing leadership, education and direct care providers.
Results: Nine participants have submitted manuscripts, with five accepted for publication. The other four remain in the review process. Other participants are in various stages of manuscript development with faculty available to support them, upon request. Session feedback included the importance of having dedicated, protected time for writing; more encouragement and support from experienced authors; and further feedback from both faculty and peers.
Conclusions: This successful partnership supported clinicians and leaders in publishing their innovative ideas and prepared them to synthesize relevant literature; prepare manuscripts; analyze peer and faculty critique; and submit the final paper to a refereed journal.
![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)