Archive for the ‘Shawn Kennedy, AJN editor-in-chief’ Category

h1

Boards of Nursing and the Amanda Trujillo Case

February 17, 2012

By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN editor-in-chief

Amanda Trujillo

Our prior post on the Amanda Trujillo case elicited many comments, on a variety of themes. There were also referrals and crosslinks to other sites supporting, analyzing, and weighing in on the situation, including statements from the Arizona Nurses Association and the ANA, and a post on a physician blog, “White Coat’s Call Room,” which has vowed to carry all the details once the case is decided.

One complaint raised by several people in response to our post was that the Arizona Board of Nursing wasn’t supporting Amanda. State nursing or medical boards are regulatory boards that exist to ensure the protection of the public and to regulate professional practice according to the law (in nursing’s case, according to nursing practice acts). They do not aim to protect the individual nurse, but to assure that all those who claim to be nurses are eligible to claim that title and practice within their scope of practice as defined by law.

Some historical context: Regulatory boards were set up back in the early 1900s, after nursing associations successfully lobbied for registration laws to keep out unqualified women who posed as nurses. In 1903, North Carolina was the first state to enact a nurse practice act; by the mid-1920s, all 48 states had laws regulating who could practice and who could use the title “registered nurse.”

Thus, boards of nursing are intended to protect the consumer and the standards of the profession.

While I agree with several comments saying that nurses should be able to practice within the full scope of their education and training, as recommended by the Institute of Medicine Report on the Future of Nursing, what’s also important to keep in mind is that we must do so in accordance with the law—which unfortunately may not always measure up to our ideals or accurately reflect actual professional practice.

Nurses and state associations need to work to change the law where it needs to be changed—and there are many people who devote themselves to making such change happen—but until the law does change, this is how nurses’ actions will be judged, whatever other motives may appear to be in play or not.

(Editor’s note: A few readers have misconstrued the last paragraph as implying a judgment in the Amanda Trujillo case. This is by no means the intended meaning. The focus here is a more general look at the roles of boards of nursing and the importance for all nurses of not leaving themselves vulnerable to accusations of going beyond their scope of practice, as it has been defined in a particular state’s practice acts.)

 Bookmark and Share

h1

The Case of Amanda Trujillo

February 2, 2012

By Shawn Kennedy, AJN editor-in-chief

Amanda Trujillo, MSN, RN, is a nurse who until recently worked at Banner Del Webb Hospital in Sun City, Arizona, until she was fired for, as she claims, just doing what she’s obligated to do as a nurse—specifically, providing a patient information about a surgical procedure in an attempt to support fully informed decision making. (You can read her e-mail detailing her story here. She did not, as she has pointed out in comments, ever attempt to directly obtain informed consent herself.)

Amanda Trujillo

Ms. Trujillo says that, when the patient had a change of heart about the surgery, she requested a hospice consult. After a physician complained that Trujillo had overstepped her scope of practice, the hospital filed a complaint with the Arizona Board of Nursing, which has launched an investigation.

Ms. Trujillo has gone public with her story, sending e-mails and tweets to editors, public officials, bloggers, and the news media. The nursing blogosphere is full of posts with her story—Emergiblog, vdutton’s posterous (which has her attorney’s response to the complaint), and thenerdynurse, as well as a number of others. On January 31, she was interviewed on local television. She makes a compelling case that she was advocating for the patient’s right to information, and one wonders why she was fired and is under investigation.

As we have been for 112 years, AJN is all for coming out in support of nurses. Do we believe a nurse’s first duty is to the patient? You bet. We’re also all about accuracy and facts, and in this case, it’s been tough getting information from all sides. While certain assertions have been repeated in most of the supportive blog posts we’ve read, the undertone is that there is more to this case than the obvious.

Here’s what we’ve learned so far from the other parties: According to Joey Ridenour, MN, RN, FAAN, executive director of the Arizona Board of Nursing, “While the investigation is ongoing, information is kept private to protect the nurse should the complaint be unfounded.” She noted that while Ms. Trujillo can go public with details, the Board cannot. She did verify that Banner Del Webb Hospital filed a complaint about Ms. Trujillo’s practice on April 26, 2011, for “non-compliance with Federal, State or contractural arrangements.”

Ridenour also verified that at the January 24 Board meeting, the Board reviewed the case, voted to continue the investigation, and requested a psychological evaluation of Ms. Trujillo. When I asked if this was unusual, she said that in general, if the board feels that there is a lack of understanding in complex cases, the Board will ask for “expert opinion.” The Board will reconvene in March to review the findings and rule on the complaint. In the interim, Ms. Trujillo’s license remains active and without restrictions. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Magnet Hospitals: It’s About the Process, Not the Designation

January 23, 2012

By Shawn Kennedy, AJN editor-in-chief

When I had a recent medical emergency, I went to the local community hospital near my home in northern New Jersey. I had been there before for outpatient testing or to the ER with a child and found the care attentive and efficient and the staff friendly and professional. Besides, it was a Magnet-designated hospital, so I was confident that I’d receive good care.

The ancillary staff was wonderful, but I found myself disappointed with the nurses on the acute med/surg unit where I was located. There was no rounding that I was aware of, and they seemed to only show up when it was time to administer meds. Only a few nurses introduced themselves, and only two nurses over three days really engaged me in any conversation. Nurses seemed to respond to call lights only for those patients to whom they were assigned. The unit clerk who promptly answered the call light intercom would say, “I’ll let your nurse know and she’ll be in soon”—when I asked for pain medication, she told me “your nurse is giving report; I’ll let her know when she’s finished.” I waited uncomfortably for more than half an hour.

There were whiteboards, but often the information—especially regarding the date and the name of the nurse—was unchanged from day to day and no longer accurate. (This was annoying, in that they kept asking me what date it was and I kept getting it wrong!)

The worst, though, was the noise level at night. I’ve worked nights, and I know it’s easy to forget to keep conversations hushed. But this unit was a good example of those that are as “noisy as chainsaws” (see our recent post on this). I was two doors down from the nurses’ station and I could hear every conversation, people singing holiday carols, detailed discussions of patients (forget HIPAA!). Requests that they reduce the noise made no difference. One night, I learned every detail about one nurse’s vacation plans while she and a colleague spoke in normal, conversational tones, occasionally laughing, while providing care to the elderly woman in the bed next to me at 2:30 am.

When I asked if they could speak a bit more quietly, one of the nurses angrily pulled back the curtain and told me that I had to understand that they needed to take care of the woman and would be done shortly. She then resumed talking about her vacation. I barely slept at all the three days I was there. It was exhausting, and I was happy to get home.

A few days later, I was admitted to a large teaching medical center in Manhattan, where I stayed for 10 days. The contrast was startling. The ICU nurses were incredibly attentive and supportive; they made me and my family feel that I was safe and in excellent hands. On the med/surg unit, the nurse manager introduced herself when I arrived. My assigned nurse for each shift would introduce herself and ask me if I needed anything; she came by frequently, even if only to poke her head in the room and say, “Everything OK?” Nursing assistants likewise introduced themselves and would inquire if I needed anything. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Remembering the Big Picture, Hypothermia, Nursing Books of the Year

January 20, 2012

From its earliest beginnings, nursing has embraced a holistic view of health. What we eat, the environments in which we work and live, our social relationships—all these influence health. Yet, as nurses, many of us shy away from looking at the big picture; instead we narrow our focus, addressing only the immediate problems of this patient, this family. It’s true that many patients treated in hospitals or outpatient clinics are there only for a short time. But how will such patients and their families fare in the long run if they lack access to public transportation to get to their follow-up appointments? How can patients recover from illness when they must choose between paying the mortgage and filling prescriptions?

That’s an excerpt from “Voices Rising,” the editorial in the January issue of AJN by Shawn Kennedy, editor-in-chief. We hope you’ll take a moment to read the whole thing and give it some thought.

Also in the January issue, you’ll find plenty of reading suggestions in the AJN 2011 Book of the Year Awards; a CE on the causes, diagnosis, and management of hypothermia; and a great deal more, including a feature, “Cardiac Catheterization Through the Radial Artery,” that advocates the use of the transradial artery rather than the femoral artery for cardiac catheterization in certain situations.—JM, senior editor

h1

Physician-centric vs. Patient-centric?

November 16, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, AJN editor-in-chief

Last week, we posted here a piece by AJN’s clinical managing editor Karen Roush, decrying the use of the term “physician extender.” It reminded me of a recent article from the New York Times on nurses with doctorates, which reported that if some physicians have their way and their legal strategy succeeds, they will be the only group permitted to use the honorific “doctor.”

Degrees vs. licenses. This borders on the ridiculous, as the title is an academic title that signifies achievement in a field of study; it is not a license. Doctoral degrees are awarded in just about every field of study, from astronomy to zoology. Physicians are awarded a doctor of medicine, dentists are awarded a doctor of dental science, and so it goes. In health care, there are dentists, psychologists, social workers, physical therapists, pharmacists, and yes, nurses too, with doctoral degrees. Nurses have been earning PhDs and EdDs (doctorates in education) and the DNSc (doctorate in nursing science) for years, and now there’s a new nursing doctorate degree—a DNP, doctor of nursing practice—that’s specific to nurses in clinical practice. They are still licensed as nurses, as that’s what they are.

This parochial thinking is held by those physicians (not all, but far too many) who still adhere to the traditional view that they, and they alone, know what’s best for patients and for health care; they’re in favor of teamwork, but only as long as the team recognizes that they are the leaders and decision makers.

Both the media and the health care system bear some responsibility for this. The system itself is physician-centric rather than patient-centric—hospital policies, practitioner admitting privileges, purchasing (especially in the OR), and scheduling have often developed around physician preferences; reimbursements almost always must go through physicians, whether or not they’re actually involved in the delivery of care.

Most media portrayals, both fiction and documentary, focus on physicians as the only important providers in health care, relegating other health professionals to low-level supporting roles (or, as Roush noted,“extensions” of physicians). Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

One Take on the Top 10 Issues Facing Nursing

October 31, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN editor-in-chief

So I’ve been in Dallas at the Sigma Theta Tau International (STTI) biennial meeting. The venue is the Gaylord Texan, a large, climate-controlled resort under a glass dome—as you leave your building and walk “outside,” you’re really not. Don’t believe the flowing stream or flowers or gardens (all real) along the walkways, or the Longhorn steer (fake) behind a fence that stands outside my building—you’re still inside. And to make it even more surreal, there are Christmas holiday decorations everywhere, including a gingerbread house the size of a small hotel room. It will be strange to step back in time to Halloween when I get back home.

A daunting list. There are a few thousand people here for the meeting, way too many sessions to choose from (20 different topics for each concurrent session period), plus rows of posters and exhibit booths. And of course, great networking. One lively session I attended was standing room only—and that’s after any floor space had been occupied by people sitting cross-legged. It was a discussion of the top 10 issues facing nursing, led by STTI’s publications director Renee Wilmeth (she’s not a nurse, which probably makes her less biased). The issues were compiled from responses provided by 30 nursing leaders, and were presented in question form:

  1. Is evidence-based practice (EBP) helpful or harmful? (Amazing how many interpretations there were of EBP, some of them—as I know from our EBP series—quite incorrect.)
  2. What is the long-term impact of technology on nursing?
  3. Can we all agree that a bachelor’s degree should be the minimum level for entry into practice? (General agreement here, despite concerns regarding the adequacy of financial support for achieving this goal.)
  4. DNP vs PhD: separate but equal? (Not much discussion—I think no one wanted to really get into this.)
  5. How do nurses get a seat at the policy table?
  6. How do nurses cope with the growing ethical demands of practice? (This generated the most discussion, especially around whether society should provide unlimited costly care to those whose personal choices contribute to their health problems.)
  7. How do we fix the workplace culture of nursing?
  8. What role do nurse leaders play in the profession?
  9. What are we doing about the widening workforce age gap?
  10. How do we make the profession as diverse as the population for whom it cares?

Your turn: would you agree that these are the ‘top 10’ issues? What’s missing? What’s here that shouldn’t be?

Bookmark and Share

h1

Legacy of the Living Legends: Slackers Need Not Apply

October 27, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, editor-in-chief

Earlier this month, I attended the American Academy of Nursing 38th Annual Meeting and Conference. With e-mails flooding my inbox and a full meeting agenda over the next few days, I was thinking of skipping the 2011 Living Legends event that took place on the first evening. Thankfully, an old friend, nurse historian Sandy Lewinson, talked me into going—it was one of the more memorable nursing events I’ve attended.

The academy honors “Living Legends” in recognition of the multiple contributions these nurses have made to the profession and the impact these contributions have made on health care in the United States and abroad. This year’s honorees are shown in the photo, from left: May L. Wykle, Meridean L. Maas, Ada Sue Hinshaw, Suzanne Lee Feetham, and Patricia E. Benner.

Credited with such achievements as creating a nursing taxonomy on nursing error, building the science of pediatric nursing in the context of the family, conducting ground-breaking nursing research, developing and implementing professional nurse governance in employing organizations, promoting policy change, and addressing the nursing shortage, these nurses join 77 other nursing notables who’ve been so honored since the first class was named in 1994. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Nurses and Patient-Centered Research

October 13, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, editor-in-chief

I’m immersed in nursing research and nursing leaders this week, attending (in order and immediately following one another) meetings of the Council for the Advancement of Nursing Science (CANS), the 25th anniversary concluding scientific symposium of the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), and finally, the American Academy of Nursing.

Wednesday was CANS and its focus on comparative effectiveness research. After an opening keynote by Carolyn Clancy, director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), who discussed the need to accelerate progress in improving U.S. health outcomes, a panel of nurses discussed different methodological considerations, from databases to competencies.

Research to help people make informed decisions. Especially interesting was a discussion of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), the research entity which was mandated by the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Killing Traditional Nursing Duties #3 – NPO after Midnight

October 11, 2011
fasting Buddha/ via Wikipedia Commons

By Shawn Kennedy, editor-in-chief

In early August, on our Facebook page, we asked if there were “old nursing habits” that should be killed off. We received a lot of feedback, which we described in a blog post called “Killing Traditional Nursing Duties #1.” We did another post on the answers to our second question, “When you give IM injections, what site do you most often use—dorsogluteal (upper outer quadrant of buttocks), ventrogluteal (lateral hip), or deltoid (upper arm)?” This also got many comments in response.

Our last question was this:Does your institution routinely follow ‘NPO after midnight’ for preoperative patients?” Here’s some of the comments we received on the blog:

My institution does follow the NPO after midnight for preop patients. I sometimes disagree d/t the time patients may be going to surgery. If a patient is not scheduled for the OR until the following day at 5 pm, why should they have to be NPO after midnight the night before?

…most of the younger anesthesiologists/CRNA’s allowed BLACK COFFEE to be drunk right up until time  of surgery. No dairy or sugar in it, obviously.

The facility that I work for does routinely follow ‘nothing by mouth’ after midnight guidelines. If the patient  is scheduled for a late surgery I may call the doctor and request that the orders be altered and in most cases the doctor’s are agreeable and will change the orders, writing NPO after midnight with the exception of clear liquids.

Responses on Facebook, however, showed a stricter adherence to the traditional no eating or drinking after midnight before surgery; it was fairly unanimous that institutions still follow this ancient practice (though one person did ask, “What’s npo?”!).

Well, it’s clear that this month’s CE article by Jeannette Crenshaw is sorely needed. “Preoperative Fasting: Will the Evidence Ever Be Put into Practice?” addresses the fact that despite 25 years of evidence and standards showing that NPO after midnight is not good practice, it is still used in most hospitals and preoperative practices. The evidence support clear liquids up to a few hours before surgery, and many groups have endorsed carbohydrate-rich beverages along with clear liquids up to a few hours before surgery.

So read Crenshaw’s article and disseminate it to your colleagues and clinical practice committees—practice changes should be based on evidence, and for this, the evidence is clear.

Bookmark and Share

h1

Federal Budget Battles Begin – Health Professions Education at Stake

October 3, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN editor-in-chief

U.S. Capitol building/Ed Siasoco, via Flickr

I’m subscribed to many listservs, mailing lists, and eNews alerts that help me keep track of news that may be important to nurses. One e-mail list I’m on is the Health Professions and Nursing Education Coalition (HPNEC), from the Association of American Medical Colleges. It closely monitors funding for health professions education.

Last week, the e-mail reported on the proposed 2012 federal budget—that is, the initial draft proposed by the House Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education departments appropriations subcommittee. Among a great deal else, this includes funding for  Medicare, the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and medical and nursing education (Title VII and Title VIII funding).

There’s already contention over the proposal, with the Democrats claiming they had nothing to do with it. According to ranking Democratic member Rep. Norm Dick, quoted in the minority party press release: “Make no mistake: this is not a committee product. This draft bill represents the ideological position of one committee member—the subcommittee chairman.”

Among other aspects, the proposal includes cuts to all monies to Planned Parenthood (as long as it continues to provide abortion services), National Public Radio, and any programs under the Affordable Health Care for America Act.

According to the HPNEC e-mail: “The bill offers a total of $87.5 million for Title VII programs, a $185 million (67.9 percent) cut, by eliminating funding for the Title VII Health Careers Opportunity Program, scholarships for disadvantaged students, primary care medicine, Area Health Education Centers, and allied health programs, and drastically reducing some other Title VII programs. For Title VIII [nurse workforce development programs], the draft bill provides $106.828 million, a $135.6 million (55.9 percent) cut, achieved through elimination of funding for the Title VIII loan repayment and scholarship program and comprehensive geriatric education, as well as reductions to other Title VIII programs.”

The press release from the Republican committee members lauds the proposal, quoting chair Hal Rogers: “To protect critical programs and services that many Americans rely on—especially in this time of fiscal crisis—the bill takes decisive action to cut duplicative, inefficient, and wasteful spending to help get these agency budgets onto sustainable financial footing.”

While this is only the first draft and no doubt there will be much haggling and political posturing, it serves as a reminder of the current rancor in Congress, where all issues seem to be battlegrounds.

You can compare funding from the prior year with the President’s request and the proposed bill, and also read the full text of the bill.

Bookmark and Share

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 291 other followers