There is a tremendous need to enhance nurses' skills so that they achieve competency in EBP in order to ensure the highest quality of care and best population health outcomes. Academic programs should ensure competency in EBP in students by the time of graduation and healthcare systems should set it as an expectation and standard for all clinicians.

Objective The objective of this study was to explore nurses' experiences and perceptions at selected United States (U.S.) healthcare sites during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Background The COVID‐19 pandemic brought rapid changes to the healthcare community. While a few studies have examined the early pandemic experiences of nurses in China and Europe, nurses' experiences across the United States have remained relatively underexplored. Design A qualitative study design was used. Methods Using a constructivist grounded theory methodology and methods, we conducted eight focus groups across four hospital sites in the eastern, midwestern and western United States. Registered nurses with a minimum of six months' experience working in all clinical specialties were eligible. Forty‐three nurses participated. Data were analysed iteratively using the constant comparative method. The COREQ guidelines supported the work and reporting of this study. Results The nurses experiencing a pandemic (NEXPIC) grounded theory emerged positing associations between four interrelated themes: Challenges, Feelings, Coping and Ethics. Nurses reported Challenges associated with changes in the work environment, community and themselves. They expressed more negative than positive feelings. Nurses coped using self‐care techniques, and teamwork within the healthcare organisation. Moral dilemmas, moral uncertainty, moral distress, moral injury and moral outrage were ethical issues associated with nurses' Challenges during the pandemic. Moral courage was associated with positive Coping. Conclusions Awareness of frontline nurses' complex and interrelated needs may help healthcare organisations protect their human resources. This new theory provides preliminary theoretical support for future research and interventions to address the needs of frontline nurses. Relevance to clinical practice Nurses face added distress as frontline at‐risk caregivers. Interventions to promote nurses' ability to cope with personal and professional challenges from the pandemic and address ethical issues are needed to protect the nursing workforce. This study offers a new substantive theory that may be used to underpin future interventions.

Background: Obtaining Magnet recognition is important to hospitals as it has been linked to positive nursing and patient outcomes. Evidence-based practice (EBP) also has been shown to positively impact these same outcomes. However, the effect that Magnet designation has on different facets of EBP when compared to non-designated institutions is less understood. Aims: To determine the differences between Magnet-designated versus non-Magnet-designated hospitals on nurses' EBP knowledge, competency, mentoring, and culture. Methods: A secondary analysis was performed on data obtained from the Melnyk et al. (2018) national study of U.S. nurses' EBP competencies. Results: 2,344 nurses completed the survey (n = 1,622 Magnet and n = 638 non-Magnet). Magnet-designated hospital nurses had higher scores in EBP knowledge (mean ± SD: 19.9 ± 6.8 vs. 19.1 ± 7.0, Cohen's d = 0.12), mentoring (22.6 ± 11.1 vs. 18.6 ± 10.1, d = 0.38), and culture (82.9 ± 21.8 vs. 74.1 ± 21.3, d = 0.41). There was no difference between the two groups in EBP competency scores (53.8 ± 16.2 vs. 53.0 ± 15.9, d = 0.05), and average scores for the 24 EBP competency items were less than competent in both groups.

Background: Nurse engagement in quality improvement (QI) improves health care quality and outcomes but is typically low in clinical settings. Purpose: An integrative review was conducted to identify facilitators and barriers of nurse engagement in QI. Methods: This integrative review was conducted using an electronic search of databases with search terms specific to nursing engagement in QI. The Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Evidence Level and Quality Guide was used to rate quality and level of evidence. Results: Nine articles met the criteria for review. Top barriers were leadership, education and training, resource constraints, data, culture, and time. Top facilitators were leadership, education and training, culture, mentors, and champions. Conclusion: High-quality literature exploring barriers and facilitators of nurse engagement in QI is lacking. Research is needed to examine the degree to which these barriers and facilitators impact engagement and how they can be addressed to increase it.