research in nursing journal articles

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 14 June 2021

Nurses in the lead: a qualitative study on the development of distinct nursing roles in daily nursing practice

• Jannine van Schothorst–van Roekel 1 ,
• Anne Marie J.W.M. Weggelaar-Jansen 1 ,
• Carina C.G.J.M. Hilders 1 ,
• Antoinette A. De Bont 1 &
• Iris Wallenburg 1  

BMC Nursing volume  20 , Article number:  97 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

17k Accesses

4 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Transitions in healthcare delivery, such as the rapidly growing numbers of older people and increasing social and healthcare needs, combined with nursing shortages has sparked renewed interest in differentiations in nursing staff and skill mix. Policy attempts to implement new competency frameworks and job profiles often fails for not serving existing nursing practices. This study is aimed to understand how licensed vocational nurses (VNs) and nurses with a Bachelor of Science degree (BNs) shape distinct nursing roles in daily practice.

A qualitative study was conducted in four wards (neurology, oncology, pneumatology and surgery) of a Dutch teaching hospital. Various ethnographic methods were used: shadowing nurses in daily practice (65h), observations and participation in relevant meetings (n=56), informal conversations (up to 15 h), 22 semi-structured interviews and member-checking with four focus groups (19 nurses in total). Data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

Hospital nurses developed new role distinctions in a series of small-change experiments, based on action and appraisal. Our findings show that: (1) this developmental approach incorporated the nurses’ invisible work; (2) nurses’ roles evolved through the accumulation of small changes that included embedding the new routines in organizational structures; (3) the experimental approach supported the professionalization of nurses, enabling them to translate national legislation into hospital policies and supporting the nurses’ (bottom-up) evolution of practices. The new roles required the special knowledge and skills of Bachelor-trained nurses to support healthcare quality improvement and connect the patients’ needs to organizational capacity.

Conclusions

Conducting small-change experiments, anchored by action and appraisal rather than by design , clarified the distinctions between vocational and Bachelor-trained nurses. The process stimulated personal leadership and boosted the responsibility nurses feel for their own development and the nursing profession in general. This study indicates that experimental nursing role development provides opportunities for nursing professionalization and gives nurses, managers and policymakers the opportunity of a ‘two-way-window’ in nursing role development, aligning policy initiatives with daily nursing practices.

Peer Review reports

The aging population and mounting social and healthcare needs are challenging both healthcare delivery and the financial sustainability of healthcare systems [ 1 , 2 ]. Nurses play an important role in facing these contemporary challenges [ 3 , 4 ]. However, nursing shortages increase the workload which, in turn, boosts resignation numbers of nurses [ 5 , 6 ]. Research shows that nurses resign because they feel undervalued and have insufficient control over their professional practice and organization [ 7 , 8 ]. This issue has sparked renewed interest in nursing role development [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. A role can be defined by the activities assumed by one person, based on knowledge, modulated by professional norms, a legislative framework, the scope of practice and a social system [ 12 , 9 ].

New nursing roles usually arise through task specialization [ 13 , 14 ] and the development of advanced nursing roles [ 15 , 16 ]. Increasing attention is drawn to role distinction within nursing teams by differentiating the staff and skill mix to meet the challenges of nursing shortages, quality of care and low job satisfaction [ 17 , 18 ]. The staff and skill mix include the roles of enrolled nurses, registered nurses, and nurse assistants [ 19 , 20 ]. Studies on differentiation in staff and skill mix reveal that several countries struggle with the composition of nursing teams [ 21 , 22 , 23 ].

Role distinctions between licensed vocational-trained nurses (VNs) and Bachelor of Science-trained nurses (BNs) has been heavily debated since the introduction of the higher nurse education in the early 1970s, not only in the Netherlands [ 24 , 25 ] but also in Australia [ 26 , 27 ], Singapore [ 20 ] and the United States of America [ 28 , 29 ]. Current debates have focused on the difficulty of designing distinct nursing roles. For example, Gardner et al., revealed that registered nursing roles are not well defined and that job profiles focus on direct patient care [ 30 ]. Even when distinct nursing roles are described, there are no proper guidelines on how these roles should be differentiated and integrated into daily practice. Although the value of differentiating nursing roles has been recognized, it is still not clear how this should be done or how new nursing roles should be embedded in daily nursing practice. Furthermore, the consequences of these roles on nursing work has been insufficiently investigated [ 31 ].

This study reports on a study of nursing teams developing new roles in daily nursing hospital practice. In 2010, the Dutch Ministry of Health announced a law amendment (the Individual Health Care Professions Act) to formalize the distinction between VNs and BNs. The law amendment made a distinction in responsibilities regarding complexity of care, coordination of care, and quality improvement. Professional roles are usually developed top-down at policy level, through competency frameworks and job profiles that are subsequently implemented in nursing practice. In the Dutch case, a national expert committee made two distinct job profiles [ 32 ]. Instead of prescribing role implementation, however, healthcare organizations were granted the opportunity to develop these new nursing roles in practice, aiming for a more practice-based approach to reforming the nursing workforce. This study investigates a Dutch teaching hospital that used an experimental development process in which the nurses developed role distinctions by ‘doing and appraising’. This iterative process evolved in small changes [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ], based on nurses’ thorough knowledge of professional practices [ 37 ] and leadership role [ 38 , 39 , 40 ].

According to Abbott, the constitution of a new role is a competitive action, as it always leads to negotiation of new openings for one profession and/or degradation of adjacent professions [ 41 ]. Additionally, role differentiation requires negotiation between different professionals, which always takes place in the background of historical professionalization processes and vested interests resulting in power-related issues [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Recent studies have described the differentiation of nursing roles to other professionals, such as nurse practitioners and nurse assistants, but have focused on evaluating shifts in nursing tasks and roles [ 31 ]. Limited research has been conducted on differentiating between the different roles of registered nurses and the involvement of nurses themselves in developing new nursing roles. An ethnographic study was conducted to shed light on the nurses’ work of seeking openings and negotiating roles and responsibilities and the consequences of role distinctions, against a background of historically shaped relationships and patterns.

The study aimed to understand the formulation of nursing role distinctions between different educational levels in a development process involving experimental action (doing) and appraisal.

We conducted an ethnographic case study. This design was commonly used in nursing studies in researching changing professional practices [ 45 , 46 ]. The researchers gained detailed insights into the nurses’ actions and into the finetuning of their new roles in daily practice, including the meanings, beliefs and values nurses give to their roles [ 47 , 48 ]. This study complied with the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist.

Setting and participants

Our study took place in a purposefully selected Dutch teaching hospital (481 beds, 2,600 employees including 800 nurses). Historically, nurses in Dutch hospitals have vocational training. The introduction of higher nursing education in 1972 prompted debates about distinguishing between vocational-trained nurses (VNs) and bachelor-trained nurses (BNs). For a long time, VNs resisted a role distinction, arguing that their work experience rendered them equally capable to take care of patients and deal with complex needs. As a result, VNs and BNs carry out the same duties and bear equal responsibility. To experiment with role distinctions in daily practice, the hospital management and project team selected a convenience but representative sample of wards. Two general (neurology and surgery) and two specific care (oncology and pneumatology) wards were selected as they represent the different compositions of nursing educational levels (VN, BN and additional specialized training). The demographic profile for the nursing teams is shown in Table  1 . The project team, comprising nursing policy staff, coaches and HR staff ( N  = 7), supported the four (nursing) teams of the wards in their experimental development process (131 nurses; 32 % BNs and 68 % VNs, including seven senior nurses with an organizational role). We also studied the interactions between nurses and team managers ( N  = 4), and the CEO ( N  = 1) in the meetings.

Data collection

Data was collected between July 2017 and January 2019. A broad selection of respondents was made based on the different roles they performed. Respondents were personally approached by the first author, after close consultation with the team managers. Four qualitative research methods were used iteratively combining collection and analysis, as is common in ethnographic studies [ 45 ] (see Table  2 ).

Shadowing nurses (i.e. observations and questioning nurses about their work) on shift (65 h in total) was conducted to observe behavior in detail in the nurses’ organizational and social setting [ 49 , 50 ], both in existing practices and in the messy fragmented process of developing distinct nursing roles. The notes taken during shadowing were worked up in thick descriptions [ 46 ].

Observation and participation in four types of meetings. The first and second authors attended: (1) kick-off meetings for the nursing teams ( n  = 2); (2) bi-monthly meetings ( n  = 10) between BNs and the project team to share experiences and reflect on the challenges, successes and failures; and (3) project group meetings at which the nursing role developmental processes was discussed ( n  = 20). Additionally, the first author observed nurses in ward meetings discussing the nursing role distinctions in daily practice ( n  = 15). Minutes and detailed notes also produced thick descriptions [ 51 ]. This fieldwork provided a clear understanding of the experimental development process and how the respondents made sense of the challenges/problems, the chosen solutions and the changes to their work routines and organizational structures. During the fieldwork, informal conversations took place with nurses, nursing managers, project group members and the CEO (app. 15 h), which enabled us to reflect on the daily experiences and thus gain in-depth insights into practices and their meanings. The notes taken during the conversations were also written up in the thick description reports, shortly after, to ensure data validity [ 52 ]. These were completed with organizational documents, such as policy documents, activity plans, communication bulletins, formal minutes and in-house presentations.

Semi-structured interviews lasting 60–90 min were held by the first author with 22 respondents: the CEO ( n  = 1), middle managers ( n  = 4), VNs ( n  = 6), BNs ( n  = 9, including four senior nurses), paramedics ( n  = 2) using a predefined topic list based on the shadowing, observations and informal conversations findings. In the interviews, questions were asked about task distinctions, different stakeholder roles (i.e., nurses, managers, project group), experimental approach, and added value of the different roles and how they influence other roles. General open questions were asked, including: “How do you distinguish between tasks in daily practice?”. As the conversation proceeded, the researcher asked more specific questions about what role differentiation meant to the respondent and their opinions and feelings. For example: “what does differentiation mean for you as a professional?”, and “what does it mean for you daily work?”, and “what does role distinction mean for collaboration in your team?” The interviews were tape-recorded (with permission), transcribed verbatim and anonymized.

The fieldwork period ended with four focus groups held by the first author on each of the four nursing wards ( N  = 19 nurses in total: nine BNs, eight VNs, and two senior nurses). The groups discussed the findings, such as (nurses’ perceptions on) the emergence of role distinctions, the consequences of these role distinctions for nursing, experimenting as a strategy, the elements of a supportive environment and leadership. Questions were discussed like: “which distinctions are made between VN and BN roles?”, and “what does it mean for VNs, BNs and senior nurses?”. During these meetings, statements were also used to provoke opinions and discussion, e.g., “The role of the manager in developing distinct nursing roles is…”. With permission, all focus groups were audio recorded and the recordings were transcribed verbatim. The focus groups also served for member-checking and enriched data collection, together with the reflection meetings, in which the researchers reflected with the leader and a member of the project group members on program, progress, roles of actors and project outcomes. Finally, the researchers shared a report of the findings with all participants to check the credibility of the analysis.

Data analysis

Data collection and inductive thematic analysis took place iteratively [ 45 , 53 ]. The first author coded the data (i.e. observation reports, interview and focus group transcripts), basing the codes on the research question and theoretical notions on nursing role development and distinctions. In the next step, the research team discussed the codes until consensus was reached. Next, the first author did the thematic coding, based on actions and interactions in the nursing teams, the organizational consequences of their experimental development process, and relevant opinions that steered the development of nurse role distinctions (see Additional file ). Iteratively, the research team developed preliminary findings, which were fed back to the respondents to validate our analysis and deepen our insights [ 54 ]. After the analysis of the additional data gained in these validating discussions, codes were organized and re-organized until we had a coherent view.

Ethnography acknowledges the influence of the researcher, whose own (expert) knowledge, beliefs and values form part of the research process [ 48 ]. The first author was involved in the teams and meetings as an observer-as-participant, to gain in-depth insight, but remained research-oriented [ 55 ]. The focus was on the study of nursing actions, routines and accounts, asking questions to obtain insights into underlying assumptions, which the whole research group discussed to prevent ‘going native’ [ 56 , 57 ]. Rigor was further ensured by triangulating the various data resources (i.e. participants and research methods), purposefully gathered over time to secure consistency of findings and until saturation on a specific topic was reached [ 54 ]. The meetings in which the researchers shared the preliminary findings enabled nurses to make explicit their understanding of what works and why, how they perceived the nursing role distinctions and their views on experimental development processes.

Ethical considerations

All participants received verbal and written information, ensuring that they understood the study goals and role of the researcher [ 48 ]. Participants were informed about their voluntary participation and their right to end their contribution to the study. All gave informed consent. The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Erasmus Medical Ethical Assessment Committee in Rotterdam (MEC-2019-0215), which also assessed the compliance with GDPR.

Our findings reveal how nurses gradually shaped new nursing role distinctions in an experimental process of action and appraisal and how the new BN nursing roles became embedded in new nursing routines, organizational routines and structures. Three empirical appeared from the systematic coding: (1) distinction based on complexity of care; (2) organizing hospital care; and (3) evidence-based practices (EBP) in quality improvement work.

Distinction based on complexity of care

Initially, nurses distinguished the VN and BN roles based on the complexity of patient care, as stated in national job profiles [ 32 ]. BNs were supposed to take care of clinically complex patients, rather than VNs, although both VNs and BNs had been equally taking care of every patient category. To distinguish between highly and less complex patient care, nurses developed a complexity measurement tool. This tool enabled classification of the predictability of care, patient’s degree of self-reliance, care intensity, technical nursing procedures and involvement of other disciplines. However, in practice, BNs questioned the validity of assessing a patient’s care complexity, because the assessments of different nurses often led to different outcomes. Furthermore, allocating complex patient care to BNs impacted negatively on the nurses’ job satisfaction, organizational routines and ultimately the quality of care. VNs experienced the shift of complex patient care to BNs as a diminution of their professional expertise. They continuously stressed their competencies and questioned the assigned levels of complexity, aiming to prevent losses to their professional tasks:

‘Now we’re only allowed to take care of COPD patients and people with pneumonia, so no more young boys with a pneumothorax drain. Suddenly we are not allowed to do that. (…) So, your [professional] world is getting smaller. We don’t like that at all. So, we said: We used to be competent, so why aren’t we anymore?’ (Interview VN1, in-service trained nurse).

In discussing complexity of care, both VNs and BNs (re)discovered the competencies VNs possess in providing complex daily care. BNs acknowledged the contestability of the distinction between VN and BN roles related to patient care complexity, as the next quote shows:

‘Complexity, they always make such a fuss about it. (…) At a given moment you’re an expert in just one certain area; try then to stand out on your ward. (…) When I go to GE [gastroenterology] I think how complex care is in here! (…) But it’s also the other way around, when I’m the expert and know what to expect after an angioplasty, or a bypass, or a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (…) When I’ve mastered it, then I no longer think it’s complex, because I know what to expect!’ (Interview BN1, 19-07-2017).

This quote illustrates how complexity was shaped through clinical experience. What complex care is , is influenced by the years of doing nursing work and hence is individual and remains invisible. It is not formally valued [ 58 ] because it is not included in the BN-VN competency model. This caused dissatisfaction and feelings of demotion among VNs. The distinction in complexities of care was also problematic for BNs. Following the complexity tool, recently graduated BNs were supposed to look after highly complex patients. However, they often felt insecure and needed the support of more experienced (VN) colleagues – which the VNs perceived as a recognition of their added value and evidence of the failure of the complexity tool to guide division of tasks. Also, mundane issues like holidays, sickness or pregnancy leave further complicated the use of the complexity tool as a way of allocating patients, as it decreased flexibility in taking over and swapping shifts, causing dissatisfaction with the work schedule and leading to problems in the continuity of care during evening, night and weekend shifts. Hence, the complexity tool disturbed the flexibility in organizing the ward and held possible consequences for the quality and safety of care (e.g. inexperienced BNs providing complex care), Ultimately, the complexity tool upset traditional teamwork, in which nurses more implicitly complemented each other’s competencies and ability to ‘get the work done’ [ 59 ]. As a result, role distinction based on ‘quantifiable’ complexity of care was abolished. Attention shifted to the development of an organizational and quality-enhancing role, seeking to highlight the added value of BNs – which we will elaborate on in the next section.

Organizing hospital care

Nurses increasingly fulfill a coordinating role in healthcare, making connections across occupational, departmental and organizational boundaries, and ‘mediating’ individual patient needs, which Allen describes as organizing work [ 49 ]. Attempting to make a valuable distinction between nursing roles, BNs adopted coordinating management tasks at the ward level, taking over this task from senior nurses and team managers. BNs sought to connect the coordinating management tasks with their clinical role and expertise. An example is bed management, which involves comparing a ward’s bed capacity with nursing staff capacity [ 1 , 60 ]. At first, BNs accompanied middle managers to the hospital bed review meeting to discuss and assess patient transfers. On the wards where this coordination task used to be assigned to senior nurses, the process of transferring this task to BNs was complicated. Senior nurses were reluctant to hand over coordinating tasks as this might undermine their position in the near future. Initially, BNs were hesitant to take over this task, but found a strategy to overcome their uncertainty. This is reflected in the next excerpt from fieldnotes:

Senior nurse: ‘First we have to figure out if it will work, don’t we? I mean, all three of us [middle manager, senior nurse, BN] can’t just turn up at the bed review meeting, can we? The BN has to know what to do first, otherwise she won’t be able to coordinate properly. We can’t just do it.’ BN: ‘I think we should keep things small, just start doing it, step by step. (…) If we don’t try it out, we don’t know if it works.’ (Field notes, 24-05-2018).

This excerpt shows that nurses gradually developed new roles as a series of matching tasks. Trying out and evaluating each step of development in the process overcame the uncertainty and discomfort all parties held [ 61 ]. Moreover, carrying out the new tasks made the role distinctions become apparent. The coordinating role in bed management, for instance, became increasingly embedded in the new BN nursing role. Experimenting with coordination allowed BNs prove their added value [ 62 ] and contributed to overall hospital performance as it combined daily working routines with their ability to manage bed occupancy, patient flow, staffing issues and workload. This was not an easy task. The next quote shows the complexity of creating room for this organizing role:

The BNs decide to let the VNs help coordinate the daily care, as some VNs want to do this task. One BN explains: ‘It’s very hard to say, you’re not allowed.’ The middle manager looks surprised and says that daily coordination is a chance to draw a clear distinction and further shape the role of BNs. The project group leader replies: ‘Being a BN means that you dare to make a difference [in distinctive roles]. We’re all newbies in this field, but we can use our shared knowledge. You can derive support from this task for your new role.’ (Field notes, 09-01-2018).

This excerpt reveals the BNs’ thinking on crafting their organizational role, turning down the VNs wishes to bear equal responsibility for coordinating tasks. Taking up this role touched on nurse identity as BNs had to overcome the delicate issue of equity [ 63 ], which has long been a core element of the Dutch nursing profession. Taking over an organization role caused discomfort among BNs, but at the same time provided legitimation for a role distinction.

Legitimation for this task was also gained from external sources, as the law amendment and the expert committee’s job descriptions both mentioned coordinating tasks. However, taking over coordinating tasks and having an organizing role in hospital care was not done as an ‘implementation’; rather it required a process of actively crafting and carving out this new role. We observed BNs choosing not to disclose that they were experimenting with taking over the coordinating tasks as they anticipated a lack of support from VNs:

BN: ‘We shouldn’t tell the VNs everything. We just need this time to give shape to our new role. And we all know who [of the colleagues] won’t agree with it. In my opinion, we’d be better off hinting at it at lunchtime, for example, to figure out what colleagues think about it. And then go on as usual.’ (Field notes, 12-06-2018).

BNs stayed ‘under the radar’, not talking explicitly about their fragile new role to protect the small coordination tasks they had already gained. By deliberately keeping the evaluation of their new task to themselves, they protected the transition they had set into motion. Thus, nurses collected small changes in their daily routines, developing a new role distinction step by step. Changes to single tasks accumulated in a new role distinction between BNs, VNs and senior nurses, and gave BNs a more hybrid nursing management role.

Evidence-based practices in quality improvement work

Quality improvement appeared to be another key concern in the development of the new BN role. Quality improvement work used to be carried out by groups of senior nurses, middle managers and quality advisory staff. Not involved in daily routines, the working group focused on nursing procedures (e.g. changing infusion system and wound treatment protocols). In taking on this new role BNs tried different ways of incorporating EBP in their routines, an aspect that had long been neglected in the Netherlands. As a first step, BNs rearranged the routines of the working group. For example, a team of BNs conducted a quality improvement investigation of a patient’s formal’s complaint:

Twenty-two patients registered a pain score of seven or higher and were still discharged. The question for BNs was: how and why did this bad care happen? The BNs used electronic patient record to study data on the relations between pain, medication and treatment. Their investigation concluded: nurses do not always follow the protocols for high pain scores. Their improvement plan covered standard medication policy, clinical lessons on pain management and revisions to the patient information folder. One BN said: ‘I really loved investigating this improvement.’ (Field notes, 28-05-2018).

This fieldnote shows the joy quality improvement work can bring. During interviews, nurses said that it had given them a better grip on the outcome of nursing work. BNs felt the need to enhance their quality improvement tasks with their EBP skills, e.g. using clinical reasoning in bedside teaching, formulating and answering research questions in clinical lessons and in multi-disciplinary patient rounds to render nursing work more evidence based. The BNs blended EBP-related education into shift handovers and ward meetings, to show VNs the value of doing EBP [ 64 ]. In doing so, they integrated and fostered an EBP infrastructure of care provision, reflecting a new sense of professionalism and responsibility for quality of care.

However, learning how to blend EPB quality work in daily routines – ‘learning in practice’ –requires attention and steering. Although the BNs had a Bachelor’s degree, they had no experience of a quality-enhancing role in hospital practice [ 65 ]. In our case, the interplay between team members’ previous education and experienced shortcomings in knowledge and skills uncovered the need for further EBP training. This training established the BNs’ role as quality improvers in daily work and at the same time supported the further professionalization of both BNs and VNs. Although introducing the EBP approach was initially restricted to the BNs, it was soon realized that VNs should be involved as well, as nursing is a collaborative endeavor [ 1 ], as one team member (the trainer) put it:

‘I think that collaboration between BNs and VNs would add lots of value, because both add something different to quality work. I’d suggest that BNs could introduce the process-oriented, theoretical scope, while VNs could maybe focus on the patients’ interest.’ (Fieldnote, informal conversation, 11-06-2018).

During reflection sessions on the ward level and in the project team meetings BNs, informed by their previous experience with the complexity tool, revealed that they found it a struggle to do justice to everyone’s competencies. They wanted to use everyone’s expertise to improve the quality of patient care. They were for VNs being involved in the quality work, e.g. in preparing a clinical lesson, conducting small surveys, asking VNs to pose EBP questions and encourage VNs to write down their thoughts on flip over charts as means of engaging all team members.

These findings show that applying EPB in quality improvement is a relational practice driven by mutual recognition of one another’s competencies. This relational practice blended the BNs’ theoretical competence in EBP [ 66 ] with the VNs’ practical approach to the improvement work they did together. As a result, the blend enhanced the quality of daily nursing work and thus improved the quality of patient care and the further professionalization of the whole nursing team.

This study aimed to understand how an experimental approach enables differently educated nurses to develop new, distinct professional roles. Our findings show that roles cannot be distinguished by complexity of care; VNs and BNs are both able to provide care to patients with complex healthcare needs based on their knowledge and experience. However, role distinctions can be made on organizing care and quality improvement. BNs have an important role organizing care, for example arranging the patient flow on and across wards at bed management meetings, while VNs contribute more to organizing at the individual patient level. BNs play a key role in starting and steering quality improvement work, especially blending EBP in with daily nursing tasks, while VNs are involved but not in the lead. Working together on quality improvement boosts nursing professionalization and team development.

Our findings also show that the role development process is greatly supported by a series of small-change experiments, based on action and appraisal. This experimental approach supported role development in three ways. First, it incorporates both formal tasks and the invisible, unconscious elements of nursing work [ 49 ]. Usually, invisible work gets no formal recognition, for example in policy documents [ 55 ], whereas it is crucial in daily routines and organizational structures [ 49 , 60 ]. Second, experimenting triggers an accumulation of small changes [ 33 , 35 ] leading to the embeddedness of role distinctions in new nursing routines, allowing nurses to influence the organization of care. This finding confirms the observations of Reay et al. that nurses can create small changes in daily activities to craft a new nursing role, based on their thorough knowledge of their own practice and that of the other involved professional groups [ 37 ]. Although these changes are accompanied by tension and uncertainty, the process of developing roles generates a certain joy. Third, experimenting stimulated nursing professionalization, enabling the nurses to translate national legislation into hospital policy and supporting the nurses’ own (bottom-up) evolution of practices. Historically, nursing professionalization is strongly influenced by gender and education level [ 43 ] resulting in a subordinate position, power inequity and lack of autonomy [ 44 ]. Giving nurses the lead in developing distinct roles enables them to ‘engage in acts of power’ and obtain more control over their work. Fourth, experimenting contributes to role definition and clarification. In line with Poitras et al. [ 12 ] we showed that identifying and differentiating daily nursing tasks led to the development of two distinct and complementary roles. We have also shown that the knowledge base of roles and tasks includes both previous and additional education, as well as nursing experience.

Our study contributes to the literature on the development of distinct nursing roles [ 9 , 10 , 11 ] by showing that delineating new roles in formal job descriptions is not enough. Evidence shows that this formal distinction led particularly to the non-recognition, non-use and degradation [ 41 ] of VN competencies and discomforted recently graduated BNs. The workplace-based experimental approach in the hospital includes negotiation between professionals, the adoption process of distinct roles and the way nurses handle formal policy boundaries stipulated by legislation, national job profiles, and hospital documents, leading to clear role distinctions. In addition to Hughes [ 42 ] and Abbott [ 67 ] who showed that the delineation of formal work boundaries does not fit the blurred professional practices or individual differences in the profession, we show how the experimental approach leads to the clarification and shape of distinct professional practices.

Thus, an important implication of our study is that the professionals concerned should be given a key role in creating change [ 37 , 39 , 40 ]. Adding to Mannix et al. [ 38 ], our study showed that BNs fulfill a leadership role, which allows them to build on their professional role and identity. Through the experiments, BNs and VNs filled the gap between what they had learned in formal education, and what they do in daily practice [ 64 , 65 ]. Experimenting integrates learning, appraising and doing much like going on ‘a journey with no fixed routes’ [ 34 , 68 ] and no fixed job description, resulting in the enlargement of their roles.

Our study suggests that role development should involve professionalization at different educational levels, highlighting and valuing specific roles rather than distinguishing higher and lower level skills and competencies. Further research is needed to investigate what experimenting can yield for nurses trained at different educational levels in the context of changing healthcare practices, and which interventions (e.g., in process planning, leadership, or ownership) are needed to keep the development of nursing roles moving ahead. Furthermore, more attention should be paid to how role distinction and role differentiation influence nurse capacity, quality of care (e.g., patient-centered care and patient satisfaction), and nurses’ job satisfaction.

Limitations

Our study was conducted on four wards of one teaching hospital in the Netherlands. This might limit the potential of generalizing our findings to other contexts. However, the ethnographic nature of our study gave us unique understanding and in-depth knowledge of nurses’ role development and distinctions, both of which have broader relevance. As always in ethnographic studies, the chances of ‘going native’ were apparent, and we tried to prevent this with ongoing reflection in the research team. Also, the interpretation of research findings within the Dutch context of nurse professionalization contributed to a more in-depth understanding of how nursing roles develop, as well as the importance of involving nurses themselves in the development of these roles to foster and support professional development.

We focused on role distinctions between VNs and BNs and paid less attention to (the collaboration with) other professionals or management. Further research is needed to investigate how nursing role development takes place in a broader professional and managerial constellation and what the consequences are on role development and healthcare delivery.

This paper described how nurses crafted and shaped new roles with an experimental process. It revealed the implications of developing a distinct VN role and the possibility to enhance the BN role in coordination tasks and in steering and supporting EBP quality improvement work. Embedding the new roles in daily practice occurred through an accumulation of small changes. Anchored by action and appraisal rather than by design , the changes fostered by experiments have led to a distinction between BNs and VNs in the Netherlands. Furthermore, experimenting with nursing role development has also fostered the professionalization of nurses, encouraging nurses to translate knowledge into practice, educating the team and stimulating collaborative quality improvement activities.

This paper addressed the enduring challenge of developing distinct nursing roles at both the vocational and Bachelor’s educational level. It shows the importance of experimental nursing role development as it provides opportunities for the professionalization of nurses at different educational levels, valuing specific roles and tasks rather than distinguishing between higher and lower levels of skills and competencies. Besides, nurses, managers and policymakers can embrace the opportunity of a ‘two-way window’ in (nursing) role development, whereby distinct roles are outlined in general at policy levels, and finetuned in daily practice in a process of small experiments to determine the best way to collaborate in diverse contexts.

Availability of data and materials

The data generated and analyzed during the current study is not publicly available to ensure data confidentiality but is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and with the consent of the research participants.

Abbreviations

Bachelor-trained nurse

Vocational-trained nurse

Evidence-based Practices

Allen D. Nursing and the future of ‘care’ in health care systems. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2015;20(3):129–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819615577806 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

NHS England. Leading change, adding value. A framework for nursing, midwifery and care staff. 2016. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/nursing-framework.pdf . Accessed 11 Nov 2020.

Institute of Medicine (IOM). The future of nursing; Leading change, advancing Health. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2011.

Google Scholar  

World Health Organization (WHO). Gloabal strategic directions for strengthening nursing and midwifery 2016–2020. Geneva: WHO Press; 2016.

Dawson AJ, Stasa H, Roche MA, et al. Nursing churn and turnover in Australian hospitals: nurses perceptions and suggestions for supportive strategies. BMC Nurs. 2014;13:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6955-13-11 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hayes LJ, O’Brien-Pallas L, Duffield C, et al. Nurse turnover: a literature review–an update. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(7):887–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.10.001 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Persson U, Carlson E. Conceptions of professional work in contemporary health care—Perspectives from registered nurses in somatic care: A phenomenographic study. J Clin Nurs. 2019;28(1–2):201–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14628 .

Senek M, Robertson S, Ryan T, et al. Determinants of nurse job dissatisfaction-findings from a cross-sectional survey analysis in the UK. BMC Nurs. 2020;19(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-020-00481-3 .

Jacob ER, McKenna L, D’Amore A. The changing skill mix in nursing: considerations for and against different levels of nurse. J Nurs Manag. 2015;23(4):421–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12162 .

Sermeus W, Aiken LH, Van den Heede K, et al. Nurse forecasting in Europe (RN4CAST): Rationale, design and methodology. BMC Nurs. 2011;10:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6955-10-6 .

de Bont A, van Exel Job, Coretti S, Ökem ZG, Janssen M, Hope KL, Ludwicki T, Zander B, Zvonickova M, Bond C, Wallenburg I. Reconfiguring health workforce: a case-based comparative study explaining the increasingly diverse professional roles in Europe. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1).

Poitras ME, Chouinard MC, Fortin M, et al. How to report professional practice in nursing? A scoping review. BMC Nurs. 2016;15(1):31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-016-0154-6 .

Jones ML. Role development and effective practice in specialist and advanced practice roles in acute hospital settings: systematic review and meta-synthesis. J Adv Nurs. 2005;49(2):191–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03279.x .

Ranchal A, Jolley MJ, Keogh J, et al. The challenge of the standardization of nursing specializations in Europe. Int Nurs Rev. 2015;62(4):445–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12204 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Lowe G, Plummer V, O’Brien AP, et al. Time to clarify–the value of advanced practice nursing roles in health care. J Adv Nurs. 2012;68(3):677–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05790.x .

Fealy GM, Casey M, O’Leary DF, et al. Developing and sustaining specialist and advanced practice roles in nursing and midwifery: A discourse on enablers and barriers. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(19–20):3797–809. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14550 .

Aiken LH, Sermeus W, Van den Heede K, et al. Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States. BMJ. 2012;344;e1717. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e1717

Lu H, Zhao Y, While A. Job satisfaction among hospital nurses: A literature review. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2019;94:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.01.011 .

Duffield C, Roche M, Twigg D, et al. Adding unregulated nursing support workers to ward staffing: Exploration of a natural experiment. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(19–20):3768–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14632 .

Chua WL, Legido-Quigley H, Ng PY, et al. Seeing the whole picture in enrolled and registered nurses’ experiences in recognizing clinical deterioration in general ward patients: A qualitative study. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2019;95:56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.04.012 .

van Oostveen CJ, Mathijssen E, Vermeulen H. Nurse staffing issues are just the tip of the iceberg: a qualitative study about nurses’ perceptions of nurse staffing. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(8):1300–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.04.002 .

Saville CE, Griffiths P, Ball JE, et al. How many nurses do we need? A review and discussion of operational research techniques applied to nurse staffing. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2019;97:7–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.04.015 .

Vatnøy TK, Sundlisæter Skinner M, Karlsen T, et al. Nursing competence in municipal in-patient acute care in Norway: a cross-sectional study. BMC Nurs. 2020;9:70. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-020-00463-5 .

De Jong JHJ, Kerstens JAM, Sesink EM, et al. Deskundigheidsbevordering en professionalisering. In: Handboek verpleegkunde. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2003. p. 396–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-9699-3_13 .

Lalleman P, Stalpers D, Goossens L, et al. RN2Blend: meerjarig onderzoek naar gedifferentieerde inzet van verpleegkundigen. Verpleegkunde. 2020;1:4–6.

Endacott R, O’Connor M, Williams A, et al. Roles and functions of enrolled nurses in Australia: Perspectives of enrolled nurses and registered nurses. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(5–6):e913–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13987 .

Jacob E, Sellick K, McKenna L. Australian registered and enrolled nurses: Is there a difference? Intern J Nurs Pract. 2012;18(3):303–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2012.02037.x .

Matthias AD. Educational pathways for differentiated nursing practice: a continuing dilemma. In: Lewenson SB, McAllister A, Smith KM, editors. Nursing History for Contemporary Role Development. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2017. p. 121–40.

Boston-Fleischhauer C. Another Look at Differentiating Nursing Practice. J Nurs Adm. 2019;49(6):291–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000754 .

Gardner G, Duffield C, Doubrovsky A, et al. Identifying advanced practice: a national survey of a nursing workforce. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2016;55:60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.12.001 .

Duffield C, Twigg D, Roche M, et al. Uncovering the disconnect between nursing workforce policy intentions, implementation, and outcomes: Lessons learned from the addition of a nursing assistant role. Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2019;20(4):228–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154419877571

Terpstra D, Van den Berg A, Van Mierlo C, et al. Toekomstbestendige beroepen in de verpleging en verzorging: rapport stuurgroep over de beroepsprofielen en de overgangsregeling. 2015. http://www.nfu.nl/img/pdf/Rapport_toekomstbestendige-beroepen-in-de-verpleging-en-verzorging.pdf

Bohmer RM. The hard work of health care transformation. N Engl J Med 2016;375(8):709–11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1606458

Ellström PE. Integrating learning and work: Problems and prospects. Hum Res Dev Q. 2001;12(4):421–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1006 .

Lyman B, Hammond E, Cox J. Organizational learning in hospitals: A concept analysis. J Nurs Manag. 2019;27:633–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12722 .

van Schothorst J, van Roekel AM,  Weggelaar-Jansen JWM, de Bont A, Wallenburg I. The balancing act of organizing professionals and managers: An ethnographic account of nursing role development and unfolding nurse-manager relationships. J Professions an Orga. 2020;7(3):283–99.

Reay T, Golden-Biddle K, Germann K. Legitimizing a New Role: Small Wins and Microprocesses of Change. Acad Manag J. 2006;49(5):977–98. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22798178 .

Mannix J, Wilkes L, Jackson D. Marking out the clinical expert/clinical leader/clinical scholar: perspectives from nurses in the clinical arena. BMC Nurs. 2013:12;12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6955-12-12

Nelson-Brantley HV, Ford DJ. Leading change: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2017;73(4):834–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13223 .

Boamah SA. Emergence of informal clinical leadership as a catalyst for improving patient care quality and job satisfaction. J Adv Nurs. 2019;75(5):1000–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13895 .

Abbott A. Linked ecologies: States and universities as environments for professions. Sociol Theory. 2005;23(3):245–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2005.00253.x .

Hughes D. Nursing and the division of labour: sociological perspectives. In: Allen D, Hughes D, editors. Nursing and the Division of Labour in Healthcare. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2017. p. 1–21.

Ayala RA. Towards a Sociology of Nursing. Palgrave Macmillan; 2020.

Chua WF, Clegg S. Professional closure. Theory Soc. 1990;19(2):135–72.

Roper JM, Shapira J. Ethnography in nursing research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2000.

Book   Google Scholar  

Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, 8th Edition. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/ Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.

Atkinson P, Hammersley M. Ethnography: Principles in practice. New York: Routledge; 2007.

Draper J. Ethnography: Principles, practice and potential. Nurs Stand. 2015;29(36):36–41. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.29.36.36.e8937 .

Allen D. The invisible work of nurses: Hospitals, organisation and healthcare. The Invisible Work of Nurses: Hospitals, Organisation and Healthcare. Oxfordshire and New York: Routledge; 2014.

Lalleman P, Bouma J, Smid G, et al. Peer-to-peer shadowing as a technique for the development of nurse middle managers clinical leadership: An explorative study. Leader Health Serv. 2017;30(4):475–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS-12-2016-0065 .

Atkins S, Lewin S, Smith H, et al. Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: lessons learned. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-21

Houghton C, Casey D, Shaw D, et al. Rigour in qualitative case-study researh. Nurse Res. 2013;20(4):12–7. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2013.03.20.4.12.e326 .

Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of Qualitative research. Thousands Oak: Sage; 2011.

Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000;39(3):124–30. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 .

Baker L, Observation. A complex research method. Library Trends. 2006;55(1):171–89.

Kanuha VK. “Being” native versus “going native”: Conducting social work research as an insider. Social Work. 2000;45(5):439–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/45.5.439 .

Dwyer SC, Buckle JL. The space between: On being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. Intern J Qual Methods. 2009;8(1):54–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800105 .

Star SL, Strauss A. Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Comp Support Coop Work. 1999;8(1–2):9–30. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008651105359 .

Allen DA, Lyne PA. Nurses’ flexible working practices: some ethnographic insights into clinical effectiveness. Clin Effective Nurs. 1997;1(3):131–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9004(97)80048-9 .

Allen D. Translational mobilisation theory: a new paradigm for understanding the organisational elements of nursing work. Intern J Nurs Stud. 2018;79:36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.10.010 .

Arrowsmith V, Lau-Walker M, Norman I, et al. Nurses’ perceptions and experiences of work role transitions: a mixed methods systematic review of the literature. J Adv Nurs. 2016;72(8):1735–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12912 .

Apker J, Propp KM, Ford WSZ, et al. Collaboration, credibility, compassion, and coordination: professional nurse communication skill sets in health care team interactions. J Prof Nurs. 2006;22(3):180–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2006.03.002 .

Currie G, Koteyko N, Nerlich B. The dynamics of professions and development of new roles in public services organizations. The case of modern matrons in the English NHS. Public Adm. 2009;87(2):295–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01755.x .

Skela-Savič B, Hvalič-Touzery S, Pesjak K. Professional values and competencies as explanatory factors for the use of evidence-based practice in nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2017;73(8):1910–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13280 .

FURÅKER C. Registered Nurses’ views on their professional role. J Nurs Manag. 2008;16(8):933–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00872.x .

Stokke K, Olsen NR, Espehaug B, et al. Evidence based practice beliefs and implementation among nurses: a cross-sectional study. BMC Nurs. 2014;13(1):8.

Abbott A. The system of professions: an essay on the expert division of labor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1988.

Clegg SR, Kornberger M, Rhodes C. Learning/becoming/organizing. Organization. 2005;12(2):147–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508405051186 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all participants for their contribution to this study.

The Reinier de Graaf hospital in Delft, who was central to this study provided financial support for this research.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Jannine van Schothorst–van Roekel, Anne Marie J.W.M. Weggelaar-Jansen, Carina C.G.J.M. Hilders, Antoinette A. De Bont & Iris Wallenburg

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.W. and I.W. developed the study design. J.S. and A.W. were responsible for data collection, enhanced by I.W. for data analysis and drafting the manuscript. C.H. and A.B. critically revised the paper. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jannine van Schothorst–van Roekel .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The research was approved by the Erasmus Medical Ethical Assessment Committee in Rotterdam (MEC-2019-0215) and all participants gave their informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

No competing interests has been declared by the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

van Schothorst–van Roekel, J., Weggelaar-Jansen, A.M.J., Hilders, C.C. et al. Nurses in the lead: a qualitative study on the development of distinct nursing roles in daily nursing practice. BMC Nurs 20 , 97 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00613-3

Download citation

Received : 11 November 2020

Accepted : 19 May 2021

Published : 14 June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00613-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Evidence-based practice
• nursing practice
• Registered nurses
• Vocational-trained nurses
• Role development
• Role distinctions
• Qualitative study

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.373; 2021

Future of Nursing

How the nursing profession should adapt for a digital future, richard g booth.

1 Arthur Labatt Family School of Nursing, Western University, London, Canada

Gillian Strudwick

2 Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada

Susan McBride

3 School of Nursing, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, USA

Siobhán O’Connor

4 School of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Ana Laura Solano López

5 University of Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica

Transformation into a digitally enabled profession will maximize the benefits to patient care, write Richard Booth and colleagues

Digital technologies increasingly affect nursing globally. Examples include the growing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic systems; society’s reliance on mobile, internet, and social media; and increasing dependence on telehealth and other virtual models of care, particularly in response to the covid-19 pandemic.

Despite substantial advances to date, challenges in nursing’s use of digital technology persist. A perennial concern is that nurses have generally not kept pace with rapid changes in digital technologies and their impact on society. This limits the potential benefits they bring to nursing practice and patient care. To respond to these challenges and prepare for the future, nursing must begin immediate transformation into a digitally enabled profession that can respond to the complex global challenges facing health systems and society.

Many exemplars show how digital technologies already bring benefit to nursing practice and education. 1 For instance, telehealth programs where nurses provide daily monitoring, coaching, and triage of patients with several chronic diseases have helped reduce emergency department admissions. 2 Mobile devices, in particular smartphones and health applications, are enabling nurses to offer remote advice on pain management to adolescent patients with cancer 3 4 and supplement aspects of nursing education by providing innovative pedagogical solutions for content delivery and remote learning opportunities. 5

The development and application to nursing of systems based on AI are still in their infancy. But preliminary evidence suggests virtual chatbots could play a part in streamlining communication with patients, and robots could increase the emotional and social support patients receive from nurses, while acknowledging inherent challenges such as data privacy, ethics, and cost effectiveness. 6

Challenges persist

Digital technologies may, however, be viewed as a distraction from, or an unwelcome intrusion into, the hands-on caring role and therapeutic relationships that nurses have with patients and families. 7 This purported incompatibility with traditional nursing ideals, such as compassionate care, may explain some nurses’ reluctance to adopt digital approaches to healthcare. 8 9 In addition, nursing’s history was as structurally subordinate to other healthcare disciplines, 10 and the profession is still cementing its relationship and leadership in health systems.

The specialty of nursing informatics has long advocated for the integration of technology to support the profession, but it has comparatively few practitioners globally. Nursing informaticians are predominantly based in the United States, where the discipline seems to have originated, but many other countries and regions are expanding their digital nursing workforce and involvement with informatics. 11 12

Slow progress in some areas has been due to a lack of leadership and investment that supports nurses to champion and lead digital health initiatives. Globally, uncertainty remains regarding the next steps the nursing profession should take to increase and optimize its use of digital technology. This challenge is exacerbated by the global diversity of the profession, including unequal access to resources such as technological infrastructure maturity and expertise. Huge differences exist among countries and regions of the world in terms of the digitalization of healthcare processes, access to internet connectivity, and transparency of health information processes.

Selected technologies: benefits and challenges

The nursing literature contains many analyses of digital technologies used to support or extend the profession, including practice (eg, hospital information systems, electronic health records, monitoring systems, decision support, telehealth); education (eg, e-Learning, virtual reality, serious games); and, rehabilitative and personalized healthcare approaches (eg, assistive devices sensors, ambient assisted living). 1 T able 1 summarizes the potential benefits, challenges, and implications of emerging innovations to practice.

Benefits, challenges, and implications of selected digital technologies in nursing

The table is not exhaustive, but the diversity of topics researched shows the profession recognizes the value and challenges of digital technologies. Given the evidence, for the profession to make further progress we recommend five areas for focused and immediate action. These recommendations should be qualified in light of regional context and professional background owing to global heterogeneity in nursing and the inclusion of digital technologies into healthcare.

Reform nursing education

We must urgently create educational opportunities at undergraduate and graduate levels in informatics, digital health, co-design, implementation science, and data science. 39 These should include opportunities to work with and learn from computing, engineering, and other interdisciplinary colleagues. For instance, nursing will need a critical mass of practitioners who understand how to use data science to inform the creation of nursing knowledge to support practice. 40 These practitioners will also need savviness and courage to lead the development of new models of patient care enabled by digital technologies. 41 42

Determining how, where, and why technology like AI should be used to support practice is of immediate interest and a growing competency requirement in health sciences and informatics education. 43 Nursing education should evolve its competencies and curriculums proactively for the increasing use of digital technologies in all areas of practice 39 while incorporating novel pedagogical approaches—for example, immersive technologies such as virtual and augmented reality—to deliver aspects of simulation based education. 44 45

Recently, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing released core competencies for nursing education, explicitly identifying informatics, social media, and emergent technologies and their impact on decision making and quality as critical to professional practice. 46

Build nursing leadership in digital health

All levels of nursing leadership must advocate more actively for, and invest resources in, a profession that is both complemented and extended by digital technology. The profession needs to evolve its use of digital technology by continuing to champion and support nurses to become knowledgeable in, and generate new scientific knowledge on, data analytics, virtual models of care, and the co-design of digital solutions with patients, differences across contexts and regions permitting.

Advancement of leadership competencies in existing informatics technologies, such as clinical decision support systems, electronic health records, and mobile technologies, is also essential: these kinds of systems will undoubtedly come with increasing levels of AI functionality. Possessing a critical mass of nursing leaders who understand the intended and unintended consequences as well as opportunities of these kinds of technologies is vital to ensure the quality and safety of nursing.

The increasing presence and recognition of the importance of chief nursing informatics officers is a step in the right direction. 47 Further, providing opportunities for nurses of all specialties to contribute to the development and implementation of digital health policies, locally and nationally, could increase future use of digital technologies in nursing.

Investigate artificial intelligence in nursing practice

The influence of AI on human decision making and labor are areas in need of immediate inquiry to support nursing practice for the next decade and beyond. AI technologies could provide the profession with huge benefits in data analytics and advanced clinical decision support.

Although many of the purported potential benefits of AI (eg, improved patient outcomes, streamlined workflow, improved efficiency) have yet to be fully shown in nursing research, 6 it is inevitable that AI technologies will be used more regularly to support and extend nurses’ cognitive, decision making, and potentially labor functions. 15

These opportunities bring new and dynamic practice considerations for nursing and interprofessional expertise. One example relates to the potential automation of inequity and injustice within systems and decision support tools containing AI 48 49 : self-evolving algorithms in systems sometimes unintentionally reinforce systemic inequities found in society.

Increased use of AI also brings novel policy, regulatory, legal, and ethical implications to the fore. The nursing profession must examine its role, processes, and knowledge against emerging ethical frameworks that explore the opportunities and risks that AI and similar innovations bring, while advocating for patient involvement in AI development and application. Floridi and colleagues offer tenets regarding AI development and the ethical considerations in using such innovations in their call to develop AI technology that “secures people’s trust, serves the public interest, and strengthens shared social responsibility.” 50 They also advocate that as guiding principles, AI should be used to enhance human agency, increase societal capacities, cultivate societal cohesion, and enable human self-realization, with an emphasis on instilling and reinforcing human dignity. 50 Further research, funding, and thought leadership in this domain are needed to help support the development of new practice policy, regulatory frameworks, and ethical guidelines to guide nursing practice.

Re-envision nurse-patient relationships

The profession must reframe how nurses interact with and care for patients in a digital world. The sheer variety of “do-it-yourself” health and wellness applications (eg, personalized genetic testing services, virtual mental health support), mobile and social media applications (eg, mHealth, wearables, online communities of practice) and other virtual healthcare (eg, telemedicine, virtual consultations) options available to consumers is impressive.

All this may seem antithetical toward the traditionally espoused nursing role—therapeutic relationships in physical interactions—but patients are increasingly empowered, connected to the internet, and demanding personalized or self-management healthcare models that fit their busy and varied lifestyles.

To maximize its impact on patient care, the profession should continue to develop virtual care modalities that exploit internet and mobile technology, drawing on its experiences with telehealth and remote models of care. 51 These care models might also be extended through virtual or augmented reality technologies or integrated with assisted living or “smart home” systems, 52 and potentially other precision and personalized healthcare solutions that leverage genomic and other biometric data.

Care approaches, interpretations of privacy, and technological interoperability functionalities should be co-designed among the interprofessional healthcare team, patients, and carers 53 and available where patients want them, ideally in both physical and digital realms. Deeper discussions and scientific research regarding access, cost, electronic resource use or wastage, and equity implications of the increasing digitalization of nurse-patient relationships will also need to be thoroughly explored.

Embrace digital practice

The profession requires a cultural shift. Its membership and leadership must demand the evolution of digital systems better to meet contemporary and emerging needs.

Too often, technology to support nursing is poorly configured, resourced, or not upgraded to respond to practice and societal trends. Nurses still commonly use practice systems that are lacking basic usability (eg, contributing to alert fatigue, reinforcing disruptive workflow processes) or generate added documentation burdens because of poor configuration and optimization. 54

There is huge variation globally in access to, integration of, and sustainability of digital technology. 55 56 57 Solutions vary and are context specific. Renewed awareness of digital technology’s use brought about by the covid-19 pandemic offers an impetus for change that nurses should embrace.

Tasks undertaken by nurses that do not add enough value to patient care present opportunities for partial or full divestment, 58 and may be better integrated into future technology enabled processes or delivered by other care providers.

The profession should revisit cultural interpretations of how technology such as drones, robots, and other AI enabled systems can be considered complementary to nursing practice and process, rather than as competition or adversaries. Collaboration with technology developers, providers, and patients will be essential to ensure success.

Although some outdated nursing activities and processes made redundant or less relevant will likely be missed by some in the profession, digital technology provides opportunities to support new models of care and approaches to nursing practice. We must not allow cultural and historical interpretations of nursing to upend or impede progress.

How nursing can stay relevant

Nurses entering the profession today will undoubtedly witness substantive disruption and change from digital technology by the time they are mid-career. 59 Without immediate action, the nursing profession stands to miss a remarkable opportunity to generate new roles, knowledge, and relationships within future health systems and societies saturated by digital technologies.

Nursing will continue to offer value and importance to healthcare systems in the coming decades. However, the profession must consider its role, knowledge, and relationships with technologies and patients to remain relevant in digitally enabled societies and healthcare systems and continue to provide compassionate care in a digital world. Without proactive strategic self-reflection, planning, and action, nursing will fail to control its trajectory across the chasm separating the past, present, and future of practice.

Key recommendations

• Nursing must accelerate the transformation to a digitally enabled profession by investing in informatics education, research, and practice
• Nurses should upskill in data science and other digital health topics to ensure emerging technologies such as AI are developed appropriately and safe for nursing practice and patient care
• Nursing must invest in and lead digital health developments and collaborate with others to develop and deliver digital tools that patients and the public need
• Nurses should champion informatics across all areas of professional practice, create leadership opportunities in digital health, and inform health policy in this area

Competing interests: We have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and have no relevant interests to declare.

Provenance and peer review: Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

This article is part of a series commissioned by The BMJ for the World Innovation Summit for Health (WISH). The BMJ peer reviewed, edited, and made the decision to publish. The series, including open access fees, is funded by WISH.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 4.4.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Impacts of an Acute Care Telenursing Program on Discharge, Patient Experience, and Nursing Experience: Retrospective Cohort Comparison Study

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Courtenay R Bruce, MA, JD   ; 
• Steve Klahn, RN, MBA   ; 
• Lindsay Randle, MBA   ; 
• Xin Li, BS   ; 
• Kelkar Sayali, BS   ; 
• Barbara Johnson, BSN, MBA, DNP   ; 
• Melissa Gomez, MBA   ; 
• Meagan Howard, MHA   ; 
• Roberta Schwartz, PhD   ; 
• Farzan Sasangohar, PhD  

Houston Methodist, Houston, TX, United States

Corresponding Author:

Courtenay R Bruce, MA, JD

Houston Methodist

8100 Greenbriar Drive

Houston, TX, 77030

United States

Phone: 1 281 620 9040

Email: [email protected]

Background: Despite widespread growth of televisits and telemedicine, it is unclear how telenursing could be applied to augment nurse labor and support nursing.

Objective: This study evaluated a large-scale acute care telenurse (ACTN) program to support web-based admission and discharge processes for hospitalized patients.

Methods: A retrospective, observational cohort comparison was performed in a large academic hospital system (approximately 2100 beds) in Houston, Texas, comparing patients in our pilot units for the ACTN program (telenursing cohort) between June 15, 2022, and December 31, 2022, with patients who did not participate (nontelenursing cohort) in the same units and timeframe. We used a case mix index analysis to confirm comparable patient cases between groups. The outcomes investigated were patient experience, measured using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems (HCAHCPS) survey; nursing experience, measured by a web-based questionnaire with quantitative multiple-choice and qualitative open-ended questions; time of discharge during the day (from electronic health record data); and duration of discharge education processes.

Results: Case mix index analysis found no significant case differences between cohorts ( P =.75). For the first 4 units that rolled out in phase 1, all units experienced improvement in at least 4 and up to 7 HCAHCPS domains. Scores for “communication with doctors” and “would recommend hospital” were improved significantly ( P =.03 and P =.04, respectively) in 1 unit in phase 1. The impact of telenursing in phases 2 and 3 was mixed. However, “communication with doctors” was significantly improved in 2 units ( P =.049 and P =.002), and the overall rating of the hospital and the ”would recommend hospital” scores were significantly improved in 1 unit ( P =.02 and P =04, respectively). Of 289 nurses who were invited to participate in the survey, 106 completed the nursing experience survey (response rate 106/289, 36.7%). Of the 106 nurses, 101 (95.3%) indicated that the ACTN program was very helpful or somewhat helpful to them as bedside nurses. The only noticeable difference between the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts for the time of day discharge was a shift in the volume of patients discharged before 2 PM compared to those discharged after 2 PM at a hospital-wide level. The ACTN admissions averaged 12 minutes and 6 seconds (SD 7 min and 29 s), and the discharges averaged 14 minutes and 51 seconds (SD 8 min and 10 s). The average duration for ACTN calls was 13 minutes and 17 seconds (SD 7 min and 52 s). Traditional cohort standard practice (nontelenursing cohort) of a bedside nurse engaging in discharge and admission processes was 45 minutes, consistent with our preimplementation time study.

Conclusions: This study shows that ACTN programs are feasible and associated with improved outcomes for patient and nursing experience and reducing time allocated to admission and discharge education.

Introduction

Telemedicine, particularly video televisits, has greatly expanded in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 1 , 2 ]. Televisits have shown promise as a robust, practical, efficacious, and scalable alternative to in-person office visits that could ameliorate labor supply shortages [ 3 , 4 ]. The published evidence suggests a generally positive attitude toward televisit appointments for chronic care, focused on addressing financial and transportation barriers and improving patients’ access to care [ 5 - 7 ]. Despite the promise shown by televisits, limited attention has been paid to applying this method in the acute care setting and, in particular, on how this promising technology can be leveraged to support nurses.

Estimates suggest that approximately 200,000 open nursing positions will become available each year between 2021 and 2031 [ 8 ]. Telenursing can augment nursing labor supply, decrease nursing workload, maintain patient and nurse safety, and positively impact nursing and patient experiences [ 9 ]. However, the impact of telenursing on outcomes in acute care settings remains a research gap.

To address this gap, this study aimed to evaluate the outcomes associated with a large-scale acute care telenurse (ACTN) program to support web-based admission and discharge processes for hospitalized patients compared to patients who did not undergo the ACTN program intervention. Admission and discharge are 2 substantive and time-consuming acute care nursing tasks that involve tedious documentation in the electronic health record (EHR) and extensive interaction with patients and families to gather history and provide patient education [ 10 , 11 ]. We aimed to develop an ACTN program to augment nursing care by conducting admission and discharge processes through telenursing in a large health system. Subsequently, we discuss the impacts on 4 end points: patient experience, nursing experience, time of discharge during the day, and length of time for discharge education processes. We hypothesized that the ACTN program would be associated with higher patient experience scores and improved nursing experience compared to standard admission and discharge practices.

This study was conducted in a large academic hospital system (approximately 2100 beds) in Houston, Texas. The preimplementation methods are reported more extensively in the studies by Hehman et al [ 12 ] and Schwartz et al [ 13 ]. Program implementation was first informed by nursing time and workload surveys and pilot implementation in 4 comparatively understaffed units. The chief innovation officer, along with nursing leaders and ACTN program administrators, met with the bedside nursing staff of these 4 understaffed units to solicit their input on where and how ACTN would add value to their workflow. Bedside nursing staff provided critical input on admission processes that could be delegated to individuals working remotely with no perceived negative impact on patient experience. We conducted participatory workflow design sessions with bedside nursing staff on the ACTN program to cocreate workflow integration points where the remote team could assist [ 13 ].

Pilot Implementation and Procedures

Before implementation, the ACTN administrators trained bedside nurses in pilot units by demonstrating the use of technology during shift huddles. Then, the trainers presented slides on contact information and available support and provided a role demarcation process map, showing what the remote telenurse staff would be doing compared to what the bedside nurses needed to do to launch and conduct discharge education. Furthermore, the trainers invited the nursing staff to observe several discharges to learn how to conduct them. A software with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliance was uploaded to iPads (Apple Inc) and stored on each unit. Handheld iPads were available, and roaming iPads were made available for patients who could not hold an iPad.

The pilot implementation was staggered in a phased rollout, consisting of 3 sequenced phases, as shown in Figure 1 . Upon admission, the acute care bedside nurse contextualized the ACTN program with patients and families by handing the patient an iPad with a preloaded remote program app (Caregility) and then pressing a soft key to allow the ACTN to enter the patient’s room via the iPad screen. The ACTN introduced themselves, completed the nursing admission profile in the EHR, placed a request for a consultation, and notified the bedside nurse that the admission was completed using secure SMS text messaging [ 13 ]. A similar process was followed for discharge workflow processes, where the ACTN completed patient education on discharge instructions, confirmed the patient’s pharmacy details, confirmed discharge transportation, and arranged for departure.

Bedside nurses used their discretion regarding which patients would be appropriate for the ACTN program. They based this determination principally on whether documentation was needed and whether the patient could benefit from the undivided attention the ACTN program could afford. Furthermore, they excluded patients from the ACTN program if the patients expressed discomfort using an iPad. After the initial rollout, patients’ input was sought on their experience with the ACTN program to identify where and how improvements could be made, and this feedback was incorporated into iterative revisions in subsequent rollouts.

Pilot Outcomes Monitoring

A retrospective, observational cohort comparison was performed, in which all patients in our pilot units for the ACTN program (telenursing cohort) between June 15, 2022, and December 31, 2022, were compared with all patients who did not participate (nontelenursing cohort) in the same units in the same timeframe.

Our primary outcomes were patient experience and nursing experience. Patient experience scope was any process observable by patients [ 14 ]. We compared patient experiences in the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts by evaluating patients’ responses to the widely used Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey [ 15 ], which represented 8 aspects (called dimensions) of patient satisfaction. Each dimension was measured using a continuous variable (0 to 100 points).

For the telenursing cohort, we analyzed bedside nurses’ collective responses using a Forms (Microsoft Corp) survey conducted in April 2023. The survey consisted of 5 questions, asking them to indicate whether the ACTN program was helpful using a Likert scale with 5 items (very helpful to very unhelpful). Nurses were asked to provide open-ended comments to explain the reasons for their evaluation. At the end of the survey, we included 2 open-ended fields for nurses to describe opportunities for improvement in future rollouts and provide any additional comments.

Furthermore, we explored the time at which discharge occurred using the EHR admission, discharge, and transfer date and time. We compared the hour of the day the patient was discharged in the telenursing cohort with the hour of the day the patient was discharged in the nontelenursing cohort, hypothesizing a priori that patients might be discharged earlier in the day in the telenursing cohort. Finally, we analyzed the duration of discharge education for both cohorts, measured in minutes.

Data Analysis

The patient demographic data were available for all patients. To confirm that the telenursing cohort had similar patient demographics as the nontelenursing cohort (and therefore to confirm that nurse biases in patient selection for the ACTN program were unlikely), we conducted a case mix index (CMI) evaluation. We first isolated the population of both cohorts into adults (aged ≥18 y). We compared only those patients who were discharged home and excluded those who were on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or those who underwent a tracheostomy. The remaining population was evaluated to determine whether there was a difference in patient acuity and severity. After confirming that patient acuity and severity were of no significant difference, we included the inpatient and observation populations to evaluate the intervention results.

For the patient experience data, independent sample t tests (2-tailed) were used to compare the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts across different HCAHPS dimensions and units. Analysis was conducted using R software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). For the nursing experience survey data, we used Excel (Microsoft Corp) to analyze the responses to multiple-choice, discrete questions and thematic analysis to evaluate the open-text fields. Thematic analysis allows for eliciting key themes that emerge based on recurring statements [ 16 ]. The analysis followed an inductive approach. This approach uses open-ended questions, allowing themes to emerge with a few previously articulated assumptions on responses. Given the limited content, CRB served as the primary coder. Coding labels were used for data contextualizing, allowing for new themes to emerge throughout the coding process, using a codebook [ 16 , 17 ]. We stored emergent patterns and themes in an electronic format.

Ethical Considerations

The hospital’s review board determined that the ACTN pilot would not be considered regulated human subjects research. All data reported in this study were aggregated and deidentified.

The demographics of the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts were relatively similar. Both cohorts had an average age of 60 years with an SD of 16.91; had a similar distribution in race and ethnicity (approximately 92/2319, 3.96% Asian; 525/2319, 22.64% Black; 425/2319, 18.33% Hispanic; 70/2319, 3.02% Native American, declined to identify, or other categories; and 1202/2319, 51.83% White); and had a similar distribution in female participants versus male participants (1249/2319, 53.86% vs 1070/2319, 46.14%). To further understand the population, the CMI analysis for acuity and severity showed that the CMI was slightly higher in the telenursing cohort than in the nontelenursing cohort, but the difference was not statistically significant ( P =.75).

Patient Experience

Among the first 4 units that rolled out in phase 1, all units experienced improvement in at least 4 and up to 7 HCAHPS domains (Table S1 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ). On average, 6 out of 8 HCAHPS domains were improved for patients in the telenursing cohort. All 4 units experienced improvements in the “overall rating” domain, and 3 of the 4 units experienced improvements in “likelihood to recommend” domain for patients in the telenursing cohort compared to those in the nontelenursing cohort within the same units. The improvement scores ranged from 1.4% for the neurosurgery unit (36 beds) to 11.6% for the medical unit (37 beds). Furthermore, all 4 units in the first phase of roll out experienced improved scores in the “responsiveness” domain by >4 points (ranging from 5% to 10.1%). A total of 2 out of the 4 units also experienced improvements in the “communication with nurses” (ranging from 1.7% to 3%) and “communication about medicines” (ranging from 3.3% to 11.7%) domains. The 2 units that did not experience improvement in the communication domains were the combined medical and surgery neurology and neurosurgical units (36 beds). Only the neurosurgical unit showed statistically significant improvements in 2 dimensions: “communication with doctors” ( P =.03) and “would recommend hospital” ( P =.04).

For the 7 units that rolled out during phase 2, only 1 orthopedic surgery unit (28 beds) experienced improvements in every domain (ranging from 0.9% to 12.5%). Medical observation unit 1 also improved in 5 areas. However, only improvements in “communication with doctors” ( P =.002), “overall rating of hospital” ( P =.02), and “would recommend hospital” ( P =.04) were statistically significant . The remaining units experienced improvements in some domains for the telenursing cohort compared to the nontelenursing cohort, with no improvement in other domains. However, the scores for “communication with nurses” and “communication with doctors” domains were improved for most of the units that rolled out in phase 2 (Table S2 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ).

For the 2 units that rolled out in phase 3, both of which were surgical cardiac units with 36 beds, 1 unit experienced improvement in every domain except “responsiveness” (ranging from 1% to 12%). The other unit only experienced improvement in the “communication with doctors” (4.9%) and “care transitions” domains (1.1%). However, none of these improvements were statistically significant (Table S3 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ).

Nursing Experience

Of the 289 nurses who were invited to participate in the survey, 106 completed the survey (36.7% response rate). Of the 106 nurses, 101 (95.3%) indicated that the ACTN program was “very helpful” or “somewhat helpful” to them as bedside nurses.

Quantitative Findings

The main reasons nurses gave for the program’s helpfulness included that it saved them time (94/106, 88.7%), allowed them to focus on more urgent clinical needs (90/106, 84.9%), allowed them to focus on activities they felt were more in line with their skill level (55/106, 51.9%), and allowed patients to have undivided attention for their discharge education (52/106, 49.1%). Among the 5 nurses who indicated that the ACTN program was somewhat unhelpful or very unhelpful, 3 (60%) indicated that workflows were not clear or needed further refinement or clarification. Furthermore, the nurse respondents shared several barriers and provided opportunities for improvement, with 91 (85.8%) out of 106 nurses offering suggestions.

Qualitative Findings

For the free-text explanation fields, all but 3 nurses (103/106, 97.2%) provided additional comments on the ACTN program helpfulness. Three themes emerged from the qualitative analysis of the free-text comments: (1) most of the nurses’ comments reflected that telenurses help bedside nurses save time, (2) respondents indicated that extra hands provided emotional and physical support in providing patient care, and (3) respondents perceived an improvement in patient safety by having a telenurse who could “catch missed” issues.

Time Saving

One of the perceived benefits of the telenursing program was saving time. One nurse said the following:

... Just putting in home medications alone takes up so much time. This new telenurse service helps [save time]

Several nurses highlighted that admission and discharge processes are so complex and time-consuming that shifting this work to the ACTN program freed nurses to perform other activities, as reflected by this nurse:

The tele RN is able to spend as much time possible sufficiently educating an admission or discharge while allowing me time to respond to the needs of my other patients saving me time on one patient especially charting.

Emotional and Physical Support

For the second theme, several responses focused less on time management and perceived efficiencies and instead centered more on the emotional appeal and support in having an extra hand, as one nurse mentioned:

Being in such a fast-paced unit, it can be a bit stressful with so many discharges and admissions. Having a helpful hand is beneficial.

Improved Patient Safety

Finally, the third theme was perceived improvement in patient safety by having a telenurse who could “catch missed” issues (eg, an incorrectly identified pharmacy details), simultaneously allowing the primary bedside nurse to focus more intensely on other needs, essentially creating a 2-fold safety promotion. Some nurses noted that they could begin carrying out orders while the telenurses began completing the admission, facilitating quicker treatment and resolution of care needs, thereby improving the safety and quality of care. One nurse mentioned the following:

Allows [telenurses] to take on thorough and accurate admissions, while also preventing any rushing the patient might experience from the primary RN.

When asked for areas of improvement, the most recurring theme was having 24 hours of support during the weekend and during the week. The second theme for improvement was the reduced time to connect to a telenurse. The third theme was the availability of iPads. Nurses mentioned that iPads could sometimes be unavailable in patients’ rooms or they may not be fully charged.

Time of Discharge

The time of day distribution is presented in Figure 2 . The only noticeable difference between the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts was a shift in the volume of patients discharged before 2 PM compared with those discharged after 2 PM at a hospital-wide level ( Table 1 ). At an individual unit level, these results were not consistent and could be further explored by patient population and their needs to discharge. The variation was further illustrated when reviewing the length of stay of patients in the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts. Only 5 out of the 12 units showed a decrease in the average inpatient length of stay.

Discharge Length

The ACTN admissions averaged 12 minutes and 6 seconds (SD 7 min and 29 s), and the discharges averaged 14 minutes and 51 seconds (SD 8 min and 10 s). The average duration for ACTN calls was 13 minutes and 17 seconds (SD 7 min and 52 s). Traditional cohort standard practice of a bedside nurse engaging in discharge and admission processes was 45 minutes, consistent with our preimplementation nursing time study.

Principal Findings

Our results suggest that the ACTN program was associated with positive nursing experiences because it saved time. Furthermore, the ACTN program was associated with higher HCAHPS scores in several domains but only in the first series of units that piloted the intervention. In phase 1, the improvement in “communication with doctors” and “would recommend hospital” scores in 1 unit was statistically significant. In phase 2, the improvement in “communication with doctors” score was significant in 2 units and that in “overall rating of hospital” and “would recommend hospital” scores were significant in 1 unit. The time of day discharge was nearly the same in both the telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts. The duration for discharge processes was less than half in the ACTN cohort compared to the nonintervention cohort.

At the time of writing this paper, the United States was experiencing a critical nursing shortage that will likely reach an epidemic level in the next few decades [ 8 ]. Despite the promise shown by telenursing, to our knowledge, only 1 existing paper documents the impact of ACTN programs on HCAHPS-measured patient satisfaction using a small cohort of patients in a single, time-limited pre- and posttelenursing analysis [ 18 ]. A study by Schuelke et al [ 18 ] revealed a 6.2% increase in “communication with meds” and 12.7% increase in “communication with nursing” domain scores; other HCAHPS domains were not evaluated. This research builds upon the promising work of Schuelke et al [ 18 ], evaluating the impact of an ACTN program on several units with a much larger cohort of patients using a staggered rollout and comparing all HCAHPS domains between telenursing and nontelenursing cohorts within the same time frame and in the same units.

By conducting granular HCAHPS analyses, we identified what we believed to be a time sequence variability in that units that rolled out in phase 1 performed considerably stronger in HCAHPS impacts than units that rolled out in later phases. An explanation for this sequence effect might be that some later adopters had less potential for high effect size, given that the first 4 units of the rollout were specifically chosen for their staffing problems compared to later units. ACTN support might have augmented the staffing support to such a degree that allowed the impacts of the program to be more salient. An alternative explanation is that the early adopters and promoters tend to have greater diffusion uptake, greater saturation and adoptability, and greater impacts compared to late adopters or those resistant to adoption [ 19 , 20 ]. Our anecdotal evidence suggests that early adopters might have wanted the telenursing program to succeed; therefore, they applied consistent implementation practices to ensure success. Adopters in later stages were more aware of barriers and potential downsides and might have been more ambivalent about telenursing and, therefore, less likely to modify their behaviors to promote the telenursing program’s success.

Another interesting finding was that the ACTN program seemed to be effective for both medical and surgical units of all specialties. Phase 1 was a mix of medical and surgical units; however, all units experienced increases in scores. Phases 2 and 3 experienced mixed results, without a clear lead for one specialty over the other. This may suggest that ACTN programs are broadly applicable across acute settings and that success depends most crucially on the need and desire of unit leaders.

Our time of day discharge findings showed only a few quantitative positive efficiencies. However, our discharge duration analysis and nursing experience survey results showed that ACTN has major time-saving benefits for nurses, suggesting a discrepancy between perceived and actual time savings versus time-of-day discharge savings. One explanation for this discrepancy may be that many factors beyond nursing impact the time of the day a patient is discharged; therefore, while the bedside nurses’ time is saved, the remaining discharge processes beyond nurses remain unaffected. Specifically, there are 3 segments of time during discharge processes: (1) the time for the discharge order and medication reconciliation [ 21 ] to the time the after-visit summary (AVS) is populated and printed [ 22 ]; (2) the time the AVS is completed and printed to the time the discharge instructions are provided; and (3) the time from providing the discharge instructions to the actual discharge ( Figure 3 ). Notably, telenurses’ involvement is currently limited to only the second segment of time. Specifically, telenurses’ involvement is not initiated until the AVS is printed by the nurse, which means that telenurses cannot positively impact any discharge activity that occurs between the time the discharge order is written and the time the AVS is printed. However, there are inefficiencies and bottlenecks in discharge processes that occur well before the AVS is printed [ 23 , 24 ]. For instance, the discharging physician may write a conditional discharge order early in the morning, listing conditions that cannot be fulfilled within a few hours or it may take bedside nursing longer than anticipated time to print the AVS.

To create a wider cascade effect for positively impacting the discharge processes for all segments of time, we are currently trying to obtain greater transparency through EHR reporting in what occurs for segments 1 and 3. For instance, at present, we know that at least 2 hospitals in our 8-hospital system have high incidence rates of conditional discharge orders that should be reduced. One hospital anecdotally reports that the discharging physician identifies incorrect pharmacies, which requires a nurse to send the scripts back to the discharging pharmacist to reconcile before discharge education can occur [ 25 ]; however, the prevalence and location of these issues remain speculative. Segment 3 is a black box of time [ 26 ]—the time it takes for hospital transport or an ambulance to arrive and move the patient to their destination and the time it takes for the family to pick up the patient. All these factors impact the discharge processes and need to be fully elucidated, explored, and streamlined. Furthermore, we hope to facilitate processes that enable telenurses to print the AVS, to remove the dependency on bedside nurses to begin the discharge education process.

Limitations

This study has several noteworthy limitations. First, the study was conducted in 1 health system and the results may not be generalizable to other settings with different patient populations, processes, and implementation strategies [ 27 ]. Second, in this study, we did not control for other factors that could impact patient and provider satisfaction as well as discharge times; telenursing can only improve upon one component in a complex set of factors limiting discharge efficiency and satisfaction outcomes. Finally, participating nurses were aware of the ongoing study, and this knowledge might have affected their behavior [ 28 ].

Future Directions

After the completion of this pilot study, the ACTN admission and discharge program has been rolled out to pilot medical units and all surgical and observation units. Our rationale for expansion rested on the premise that nursing experience is important to maintain and strengthen, particularly at a time when turnover is high in the health care industry in general. It is important to reduce staff inefficiencies in workload as a means of preserving or strengthening organizational morale and cost saving. Because our nursing experience findings for the ACTN program heavily supported the program, this served as the primary motivation for expansion. The nursing experience findings, coupled with the findings related to time-savings in discharge education and modest improvement, though not negative, in the HCAHPS findings for the ACTN program compared to the nontelenursing cohort, further supported expansion.

The initial scope for expansion included a complete system-wide implementation for all admissions and discharges. Furthermore, we are planning to expand the ACTN program beyond admissions and discharges. Responsive to qualitative feedback reported earlier, the next phase of the ACTN program will add safeguards on high-risk medications by having telenurses conduct double-checks, skin assessments, hourly rounding assistance, and auditing of safety functions and educational activities. These activities were chosen because they are time-intensive for nursing staff on the patient floors. Additional support in these areas would be a staff morale booster in addition to improved efficiencies for bedside nursing. Conducting hourly rounding using the ACTN program will require more time and resources; however, conducting high-quality, uninterrupted hourly rounds is known to be effective at improving patient safety and patient experience outcomes [ 29 ]. Therefore, we suspect that the ACTN program will have some positive impacts if rounds are consistently conducted, even if conducted virtually.

In addition, the ACTNs have been motivating other specialties to adopt or consider a similar program as the ACTN program to support stretched staffing. These specialties include respiratory care, in which virtual support can quickly identify patients in need of intensive on-site support; pharmacy, in which direct communication with staff on medications and patient training can happen through virtual means; infection control, in which room environments can be reviewed through virtual audits, moving quickly from floor to floor; and guest relations and spiritual care, in which patients can be visited virtually upon patient request. Furthermore, physicians who wish to either virtually enter inpatient rooms during their clinic days or from home can quickly drop in to see patients using the virtual program. For these groups to further develop advanced inpatient telemedicine programs, additional technology will be required, including cameras that can zoom into various portions of the room and advanced sound capabilities. Future work could expand programs similar to ACTN to specialties such as respiratory therapy, pharmacy, infection prevention, and spiritual care.

Conclusions

This study provides preliminary evidence suggesting that telenursing may effectively address nursing shortages in acute care settings and positively impact patient and provider satisfaction as well as admission and discharge times. More work is needed to validate the findings in other settings, use other satisfaction metrics, and investigate the impact of telenursing on the quality of care and cost.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Jacob M Kolman, MA, ISMPP CMPP, senior scientific writer, Houston Methodist Academic Institute, for the critical review and for providing formatting feedback on this manuscript. The authors would also like to thank Amir Hossein Javid for his help with statistical analysis.

Data Availability

Data sharing is not applicable as no data sets were generated during this study.

Authors' Contributions

All authors were involved in the conceptualization, review and approval, and writing of the manuscript. LR, BJ, MG, RS, SK, and MH were extensively involved in the implementation of the project. BJ, MH, SK, and MG conducted the training. SK and XL conducted the analyses. CRB wrote and edited the manuscript, inserted and refined the citations, and provided critical feedback during implementation and analyses. CRB and FS were involved in all stages of writing and publication. All authors meaningfully contributed to the drafting, writing, brainstorming, executing, finalizing, and approving of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Additional outcome information for Hospital Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems, time of day discharges, and discharge education processes.

• Greiwe J. Telemedicine lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. Jan 21, 2022;22(1):1-5. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Doraiswamy S, Abraham A, Mamtani R, Cheema S. Use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. Dec 01, 2020;22(12):e24087. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ekeland AG, Bowes A, Flottorp S. Effectiveness of telemedicine: a systematic review of reviews. Int J Med Inform. Nov 2010;79(11):736-771. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Nanda M, Sharma R. A review of patient satisfaction and experience with telemedicine: a virtual solution during and beyond COVID-19 pandemic. Telemed J E Health. Dec 01, 2021;27(12):1325-1331. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Yu X, Bayram A. Managing capacity for virtual and office appointments in chronic care. Health Care Manag Sci. Dec 2021;24(4):742-767. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Laskowski ER, Johnson SE, Shelerud RA, Lee JA, Rabatin AE, Driscoll SW, et al. The telemedicine musculoskeletal examination. Mayo Clin Proc. Aug 2020;95(8):1715-1731. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hughes L, Petrella A, Phillips N, Taylor RM. Virtual care and the impact of COVID-19 on nursing: a single centre evaluation. J Adv Nurs. Feb 2022;78(2):498-509. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Pulse on the nation’s nurses survey series: COVID-19 two-year impact assessment survey. American Nurses Foundation. Mar 1, 2022. URL: https:/​/www.​nursingworld.org/​~4a2260/​contentassets/​872ebb13c63f44f6b11a1bd0c74907c9/​covid-19-two-year-impact-assessment-written-report-final.​pdf [accessed 2023-04-14]
• Abraham C, Jensen C, Rossiter L, Dittman Hale D. Telenursing and remote patient monitoring in cardiovascular health. Telemed J E Health. Sep 08, 2023. (forthcoming). [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rouleau G, Gagnon M, Côté J, Payne-Gagnon J, Hudson E, Dubois CA. Impact of information and communication technologies on nursing care: results of an overview of systematic reviews. J Med Internet Res. Apr 25, 2017;19(4):e122. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Moy AJ, Schwartz JM, Chen R, Sadri S, Lucas E, Cato KD, et al. Measurement of clinical documentation burden among physicians and nurses using electronic health records: a scoping review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. Apr 23, 2021;28(5):998-1008. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hehman MC, Fontenot NM, Drake GK, Musgrove RS. Leveraging digital technology in nursing. Health Emerg Disaster Nurs. 2023;10:41-45. [ CrossRef ]
• Schwartz RL, Hamlin SK, Vozzella GM, Randle LN, Klahn S, Maris GJ, et al. Utilizing telenursing to supplement acute care nursing in an era of workforce shortages: a feasibility pilot. Comput Inform Nurs. Feb 01, 2024;42(2):151-157. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Cleary PD. Evolving concepts of patient-centered care and the assessment of patient care experiences: optimism and opposition. J Health Polit Policy Law. Aug 28, 2016;41(4):675-696. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• CAHPS hospital survey. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. URL: https://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/surveys-guidance/hospital/index.html [accessed 2023-10-12]
• Strauss A, Corbin JM. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications; 1990.
• Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Marconi VC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough? Qual Health Res. Mar 2017;27(4):591-608. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Schuelke S, Aurit S, Connot N, Denney S. Virtual nursing: the new reality in quality care. Nurs Adm Q. 2019;43(4):322-328. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY. Free Press of Glenco; 1962.
• Mohammadi MM, Poursaberi R, Salahshoor MR. Evaluating the adoption of evidence-based practice using Rogers's diffusion of innovation theory: a model testing study. Health Promot Perspect. 2018;8(1):25-32. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Fernandes BD, Almeida PH, Foppa AA, Sousa CT, Ayres LR, Chemello C. Pharmacist-led medication reconciliation at patient discharge: a scoping review. Res Social Adm Pharm. May 2020;16(5):605-613. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Federman A, Sarzynski E, Brach C, Francaviglia P, Jacques J, Jandorf L, et al. Challenges optimizing the after visit summary. Int J Med Inform. Dec 2018;120:14-19. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Bristol AA, Elmore CE, Weiss ME, Barry LA, Iacob E, Johnson EP, et al. Mixed-methods study examining family carers' perceptions of the relationship between intrahospital transitions and patient readiness for discharge. BMJ Qual Saf. Aug 2023;32(8):447-456. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Piniella NR, Fuller TE, Smith L, Salmasian H, Yoon CS, Lipsitz SR, et al. Early expected discharge date accuracy during hospitalization: a multivariable analysis. J Med Syst. May 12, 2023;47(1):63. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Schnipper JL, Reyes Nieva H, Yoon C, Mallouk M, Mixon AS, Rennke S, et al. What works in medication reconciliation: an on-treatment and site analysis of the MARQUIS2 study. BMJ Qual Saf. Aug 2023;32(8):457-469. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Abu HO, Anatchkova MD, Erskine NA, Lewis J, McManus DD, Kiefe CI, et al. Are we "missing the big picture" in transitions of care? Perspectives of healthcare providers managing patients with unplanned hospitalization. Appl Nurs Res. Dec 2018;44:60-66. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Leung L. Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. J Family Med Prim Care. 2015;4(3):324-327. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Merrett F. Reflections on the Hawthorne effect. Educ Psychol. Jan 2006;26(1):143-146. [ CrossRef ]
• Mitchell M, Lavenberg JG, Trotta RL, Umscheid CA. Hourly rounding to improve nursing responsiveness: a systematic review. J Nurs Adm. Sep 2014;44(9):462-472. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

Edited by T de Azevedo Cardoso, G Eysenbach; submitted 06.11.23; peer-reviewed by C Jensen; comments to author 08.12.23; revised version received 16.01.24; accepted 17.02.24; published 04.04.24.

©Courtenay R Bruce, Steve Klahn, Lindsay Randle, Xin Li, Kelkar Sayali, Barbara Johnson, Melissa Gomez, Meagan Howard, Roberta Schwartz, Farzan Sasangohar. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 04.04.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

• Search UNH.edu
• Search Inquiry Journal

Commonly Searched Items:

• Academic Calendar

Analyzing Quality of Care in New Hampshire Nursing Homes in Relation to Ownership Status

During the summer of 2023, I participated in the Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) program through the Hamel Center for Undergraduate Research at the University of New Hampshire. Conducting undergraduate research through the Hamel Center provided me with the unique opportunity to advance my understanding of data analytics beyond what had been introduced in my courses. As an analytical-economics major with a minor in statistics, I had a baseline understanding of data analysis and its applications through introduction to open-source programming languages such as Python, RStudio, and statistical software JMP. My coursework allowed me to demonstrate that I have the practical skills and potential to learn varying coding and computational platforms in preparation for a career as a data analyst. However, conducting undergraduate research allowed me to leverage a real-world application of data analytics while enabling my exploration of an industry I am interested in.

Following my completion of the course Health Economics (ECON620) I was inspired to continue exploring how my love for economics may be employed to help others. Having volunteered in nursing homes throughout my twelve years as a Girl Scout, I hoped to pay tribute to all the wonderful friends I made during that time by using healthcare analytics to find ways to improve quality of care for the approximately 5,807 New Hampshire residents in skilled nursing facilities. My research investigated the seventy-three skilled nursing facilities in New Hampshire to identify whether a relationship exists between ownership type and quality of care.

Residents of skilled nursing facilities are a uniquely vulnerable population whose overall health status is expected to decline somewhat, since often, deteriorating health measures are what cause them to move into these facilities. Because of this anticipated decline in health status, researchers must work carefully to accurately identify accepted quality of care measures, referring to state and federal guidelines frequently. The goal of my research was to investigate whether a relationship exists between economic indicators and quality of care, with the intent to contextualize and visualize the current state of this industry in New Hampshire. Identifying economic indicators such as ownership type, staffing indicators, and rurality indicators provides the researcher with the ability to better identify where policy is needed to improve skilled nursing facility quality of care.

Understanding Data

Nursing homes have varying types of ownership: for-profit, nonprofit, or government owned. I was unable to visit all of New Hampshire’s seventy-three skilled nursing facilities to investigate each one’s level of care, and thus I relied on publicly available quality of care indicators. Publicly available quality of care measures allow prospective residents and those related to current residents to monitor the average level of care provided in an individual skilled nursing facility. In addition to this, quality of care indicators allow researchers to quantify and statistically describe the variance in care within individual skilled nursing facilities. These indicators include variables such as rehospitalization percentages, mobility improvement, percentage of outpatient hospital emergencies, and more.

To collect this data, I downloaded varying datasets from CMS.gov, including provider information, skilled nursing facility quality reporting program national data, skilled nursing facility minimum dataset quality measures, penalties, state-level health inspection data, fire safety deficiencies, Medicare claims quality measures, health deficiency data, health inspection dates, and ownership. Using RStudio, I combined these datasets, using their shared variable of CMS certification number to create one large dataset encompassing national data. Then I filtered this dataset to include only nursing homes within New Hampshire, to keep the study’s scope manageable to best accommodate the project’s ten-week span. From this point, I was able to focus on each of the seventy-three skilled nursing facilities in the state. I added a rurality indicator to each skilled nursing facility, with a 1 indicating location in a rural area and a 0 indicating the opposite, to allow for better visualization of the barriers New Hampshire residents face when deciding upon a skilled nursing facility. It was important to include these rurality indicators to investigate whether additional barriers for quality care exist for New Hampshire state residents because of geographic location. This also allowed me to investigate the dispersion of for-profit and nonprofit skilled nursing facilities based on geographic location.

The opportunity to create my own dataset provided me the chance to better understand the steps taken to conduct an effective research study. I was faced with the task of cleaning and processing the dataset I created for this study. Although this had been alluded to in my courses, I had not yet been tasked with conducting the cleaning process myself. Cleaning a dataset means reformatting data to successfully load and manipulate it within a coding platform through fixing incorrectly inputted or formatted values, ensuring there is no duplication of variables, and restructuring how variables were inputted. An instance of variable reformatting meant changing how measurements of time were recorded or changing the format from hours and minutes to aggregated minutes. I replaced missing values with means, and had to correct typos as well as reformat data types to best display the data (such as denoting variables as geographic indicators to map the variables). During the cleaning/processing portion of this project, I filtered out facilities that served only short-term rehabilitation patients to focus on the specific population of long-stay residents at a skilled nursing facility. The opportunity to clean and process my own dataset grew my understanding of data analytics, requiring me to acquaint myself with the meticulous requirements for effective data analysis.

Data Analysis

Following data collection and cleaning, I began univariate analysis—the analysis of singular variables on their own—such as quality rating, mobility improvement, rehospitalization rate, number of falls resulting in hospitalization, and other indicators of quality of care.  

When analyzing quality of care in this population, I compared the quality measures of the seventy-three skilled nursing facilities in New Hampshire to the national and state averages to account for expected levels of declining health measures. Focusing on variance of quality of care from national and state averages allowed me to better understand how each individual skilled nursing facility performed, accounting for anticipated health decline, to identify the level of care being provided. Thus, quality of care in this study was calculated using a combination of these deviations from the expected averages for long-stay patients only, omitting data collected from patients staying for short-term rehabilitation.

I was able to investigate the properties of each of the collected variables, calculating descriptive statistics for each of the variables used in data analysis. Descriptive statistics such as mean, median, and mode allowed me to investigate the central tendency of each variable, indicating the calculated middle of each variable’s distribution. Calculating the standard deviation, interquartile range, and range allowed me to understand the spread of the variables and identify potential outliers.

Calculating these descriptive statistics allowed me to confirm the conditions to analyze the distributions of the variables. Conditions for such an analysis include a sample size of greater than thirty, a normal distribution, independence of variables, and no outliers being present. A normal distribution is one where the variables are clustered around the mean, and the distribution tapers off on both sides at a similar rate.

Once these variables were checked, I was able to use Tableau, a data visualization tool, to create models showcasing the dispersion of variables. I filtered data by varying conditions such as facility ownership, rurality, and various quality measures, creating charts and graphs to represent the state of New Hampshire’s nursing home market. Specific maps were created to showcase the dispersal of nonprofit versus for-profit skilled nursing facilities, using the rurality indicator to understand how a New Hampshire resident’s city may impact access to skilled nursing facilities with different ownership models. In addition to this, I created graphical depictions of various quality of care measures, filtered by ownership and rurality indicators.

Results and Discussion

My research revealed that New Hampshire has 45 for-profit skilled nursing facilities, 16 nonprofit skilled nursing facilities, and 12 government-owned skilled nursing facilities. When investigating the 28 nonprofit and government-owned skilled nursing facilities within the state, my faculty mentor Dr. Esmaeil Bahalkeh and I found an average quality rating of 3.346, with a standard deviation of 1.03 for the nonprofit/government-owned nursing homes. With 95% confidence level we determined the true mean quality of care value falls between 2.96176 and 3.730778. These quality ratings are measured out of 5, and account for short-term and long-term quality of care indicators. This indicator is of utmost importance to those shopping for skilled nursing facilities, because it aggregates measures of positive and negative indicators such as emergency visits to the hospital, mobility improvement, number of falls, and hours per registered nurse per resident per day.

The distribution of the nonprofit/government-owned nursing homes appears approximately normal. However, the two-outlier low quality of care skilled nursing facilities skews the distribution slightly left. The 45 for-profit nursing facilities have an average quality rating of 3.477, with a standard deviation of 1.151. With 95% confidence level we determined the true mean quality rating falls between 3.127 and 3.827.

The distribution of quality ratings for for-profit nursing facilities is relatively normal with a right skew. Because the 95% confidence interval for quality rating of nonprofit/government-owned nursing facilities overlaps with the for-profit nursing facilities’ 95% confidence interval, we are unable to conclude that there is a significant difference in mean quality of care between ownership types.

When comparing the quality ratings for nonprofit nursing homes in New Hampshire with state averages, we see that nonprofit and government-owned facilities average a slightly lower quality rating. However, the for-profit nursing facilities average a slightly higher quality rating. This evidence leads us toward the conclusion that the original hypothesis that for-profit nursing facilities have a worse average quality of care is likely false. Drawing definite conclusions about the true state of quality of care by ownership status requires further research. Steps such as removing outliers, focusing on long-term quality of care ratings, and investigating staffing ratings will provide further evidence to determine if ownership significantly impacts quality of care.

With both for-profit and nonprofit facilities having an average quality rating above a 3, we infer that New Hampshire has relatively high quality care within skilled nursing facilities. However. there is room for future research through comparing New Hampshire nursing facilities with those in nearby states such as Maine, Vermont, and Massachusetts, since these states are geographic alternatives for New Hampshire residents.

Of the 45 for-profit owned nursing facilities in New Hampshire, 21 were owned by Genesis Healthcare, which represents 46.67% of the for-profit skilled nursing facilities in the state. To determine if there is a significant difference between the quality of care at for-profit nursing facilities owned by Genesis Healthcare and the 24 other for-profit-owned nursing facilities, the distributions would need to qualify a few conditions. However, this research project’s sample size of for-profit nursing facilities was not adequate to make the comparison. To investigate whether Genesis Healthcare owning a nursing facility has a significant difference on quality of care, a new investigation would need to be run, and I recommend a difference-in-difference investigation, comparing quality of care indicators for nursing facilities before and after they are purchased by Genesis Healthcare. At this time, we accept that Genesis Healthcare owns a significant proportion of for-profit-owned nursing facilities. However, with only 21 facilities being owned by Genesis, and 24 being owned by general for-profit ownership, and neither of these samples greater than the required 30, we cannot properly investigate differences in quality of care.

From SURF to Internship

Following my completion of SURF, I began to search for an internship for the summer of 2024. While connecting with employers at one of UNH’s Career and Professional Success Career Fairs, I saw firsthand the impact SURF had on my ability to network with employers. Not only was I able to showcase that I had an introduction to data analysis, but my research experience acted as a point of connection for certain industries. While completing SURF allowed me to demonstrate my technical data analytics skills, I was also able to speak to recruiters from nursing homes, health insurance companies, and hospitals by leveraging my introduction to healthcare analytics. With a more general data analytics background provided through my coursework, the unique opportunity of analyzing an area of my professional interest helped me differentiate myself from other hopeful data analysts.  

In fall 2023 I applied for the Analyst Development Program with Liberty Mutual Insurance. During the interview process, I was able to reference my SURF project in discussing my firsthand experience with data analysis, and the project also provided a testament to my work ethic. The final interview lasted three hours. It consisted of a thirty-minute overview, a one-hour behavioral interview, a one-hour case study, and a thirty-minute job shadow. During the behavioral interview my SURF experience demonstrated my ability to work in an online/hybrid manner, my time management skills, and my passion for data analysis. I proved to the interviewers I could independently bridge my own knowledge gaps, in addition to learning from a mentor, which is an aspect of the Analyst Development Program. I received the internship and am looking forward to working via a hybrid arrangement in their Boston office in summer 024.

While being an analytical-economics major pursuing a minor in statistics, my coursework has provided me with the tools to enter the workforce as a successful data analyst. However, it is my completion of undergraduate research experiences such as the Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship that proves to recruiters that I am not only capable of doing the job, but I am the best candidate for it. Participating in such a high-impact experience has taken my understanding of data analytics from a classroom level to one that can and has been employed in real-world scenarios. The opportunity to work closely with real-world data relating to my greater community provided me the firsthand chance to understand the complexities of working with real-world data, and the complications relating to healthcare analytics in particular.

I would first like to extend a thank-you to my wonderful mentor Dr. Esmaeil Bahalkeh, whose patience in guiding me through understanding healthcare analytics was an invaluable asset in my completion of my Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship. To the incredible staff at the Hamel Center for Undergraduate Research with whom I have had the pleasure to work these past three years, Dr. Paul Tsang, Amanda Leger, and Dr. Molly Doyle, thank you for not only the opportunities to expand my journey with research but the compassion and patience you have shown me throughout this process. Thank you to my former faculty mentor for the Hamel Center’s Research Experience and Apprenticeship Program for introducing me to and cultivating my love for health economics. I am incredibly grateful for the opportunities I have been lucky enough to pursue within undergraduate research, and the deeper love for inquisition and learning that has resulted from these experiences. I want to conclude my acknowledgments with a thank-you to my parents for their continued support as I explore the realm of research.

Author and Mentor Bios

Originally from Chagrin Falls, Ohio, Mary “MJ” Condon will graduate in May 2025 with a bachelor of science degree in analytical economics, with a minor in statistics. She is a Paul Scholar, and member of Omicron Delta Epsilon the International Honors’ Society at the University of New Hampshire. A course in health economics inspired MJ to pursue this research project that would expand her understanding of Health Analytics, while also impacting the greater community in the state of New Hampshire. Her Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship allowed her to gain firsthand experience in the intricacies of analyzing real data, from collecting and processing my own data for the first time, to diving into the complexities that arise when investigating healthcare data. MJ enjoyed the creativity of crafting her own study and submitted to Inquiry to showcase to other curious students that undergraduate research is for every student regardless of discipline. She says that “the opportunity to discover something new about a topic and the ability to change systems through research has helped me better understand my own college major and possible careers.” MJ hopes to pursue graduate school, continuing in her field of economics.

Esmaeil Bahalkeh is an assistant professor in the health management and policy department. He started teaching at the University of New Hampshire in 2021 and specializes in healthcare operations management, health analytics, healthcare processes, and quality improvement. Because of their mutual research interest in healthcare analytics and long-term care, MJ and Dr. Bahalkeh decided to investigate variations in nursing home quality metrics across the state of New Hampshire. He found it interesting to discover that nursing homes in New Hampshire vary widely in terms of quality metrics and features. He describes collecting nursing home data from different sources as one of the challenging parts of the project that MJ completed successfully. On working with MJ, Dr. Bahalkeh says, “It was a fun and rewarding experience” and that he looks forward to similar mentorship opportunities in the future.

CONTACT THE AUTHOR > 

Copyright 2023 © MJ Codon

• Research Article

Inquiry Journal

Spring 2024 issue.

• Sustainability
• Embrace New Hampshire
• University News
• The Future of UNH
• Campus Locations
• Calendars & Events
• Directories
• Facts & Figures
• Academic Advising
• Colleges & Schools
• Degrees & Programs
• Undeclared Students
• Course Search
• Study Abroad
• Career Services
• How to Apply
• Visit Campus
• Undergraduate Admissions
• Costs & Financial Aid
• Net Price Calculator
• Graduate Admissions
• UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law
• Housing & Residential Life
• Clubs & Organizations
• New Student Programs
• Student Support
• Fitness & Recreation
• Student Union
• Health & Wellness
• Student Life Leadership
• Sport Clubs
• UNH Wildcats
• Intramural Sports
• Campus Recreation
• Centers & Institutes
• Undergraduate Research
• Research Office
• Graduate Research
• FindScholars@UNH
• Business Partnerships with UNH
• Professional Development & Continuing Education
• Research and Technology at UNH
• Request Information
• Current Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Alumni & Friends