Although we theorize that nurses "make a difference" to patient outcomes and speculate that this happens because nurses "care", there is so far little evidence to support this nebulous claim. Efforts to promote care as the defining characteristic of nursing, and an "ethic of care" as the ethical basis of nursing, have sparked debate within the discipline. This debate has resulted in a polarization that has effectively stalled productive discourse on the issues. Moreover, the focus on care has been at the expense of understanding the true nature of the relationship between caring and the broader base of ethical knowledge that underpins nursing and that must underpin nursing if it is a viable practice profession. This paper used the framework of philosophical argument to explore the moral and ethical foundations of nursing from the perspective of personal and public morals, and responsive nurse-patient relationships as the reflection of ethical nursing knowledge. The foundation of ethical nursing knowledge is the personal moral sense that resides within the individual and that nurses hold in common with others. Personal moral knowledge is transformed into disciplinary ethical knowledge specific to nursing through disciplinary consensus. Responsive relationships are conceptualized in the nursing literature as founded on three essential elements: respect, trust, and mutuality. These three elements are grounded in ethical nursing knowledge; therefore responsive nurse-patient relationships reflect both personal moral knowledge and disciplinary ethical knowledge. By facilitating the articulation of ethical nursing knowledge in practice, responsive relationships connect theory, ethical knowledge, and clinical outcomes.
Nurse practitioners (NPs) are increasingly called on to provide high-quality health-care particularly for people who face significant barriers to accessing services. Although discourses of social justice have become relatively common in nursing and health services literature, critical analyses of how NP roles articulate with social justice issues have received less attention. In this study, we examine the role of NPs from a critical social justice perspective. A critical social justice lens raises morally significant questions, for example, why certain individuals and groups bear a disproportionate burden of illness and suffering; what social conditions contribute to disparities in health and social status; and what social mandate NPs ought to develop in response to these realities. In our analysis, we draw on lessons learned from the initial Canadian experience with the introduction of NPs in the 1970s to consider the renewed and burgeoning interest in NPs in Canada, Australia and elsewhere. As we argue, a critical social justice perspective (in addition to the biomedical foci of NP practice) will be essential to sustaining long-term, socially responsive NP roles and achieving greater equity in health and health-care.
Medical shortages are seen as the driving force behind the recent implementation of the advanced nurse practitioner (ANP) role in some Canadian hospitals. The authors analyzed the implementation of the ANP role in one tertiary care teaching hospital from the organizational change perspective. Despite successful implementation, issues of role definition, scope of practice boundaries, and staff reactions remain unresolved. Recommendations are discussed for implementing ANP roles in other acute care facilities.
Nursing's disciplinary recognition of 'multiple ways of knowing' reflects an epistemological diversity that supports nursing praxis. Nursing as praxis offers a conceptual way to explore what it is about the interface of practice, knowledge and evidence in nursing that distinguishes us as a discipline. I suggest that the relationship between evidence and knowledge is defined and mediated by the same epistemological diversity that supports nursing as praxis. Just as the meaning and truth-value of evidence is evaluated from within the body of existing disciplinary knowledge, new evidence may prompt an evaluation of the meaning and truth-value of extant nursing knowledge. Nursing practice that relies on scientific evidence as a singular basis of practice knowledge is susceptible to exploitation by the diverse agendas operating within an ideology of evidence-based practice and the healthcare system. Mediating the meaning of evidence for nursing practice through acknowledgement of the diverse epistemologies that underpin nursing knowledge will contribute to a disciplinary-specific definition of what constitutes evidence for nursing, and will better direct how evidence is integrated into a disciplinary body of knowledge.
This article reports those findings related to maternal-infant health outcomes of an ethnographic study that explored nursing practice, continuity of care, and health outcomes in one remote First Nations community in northern Canada. Use of multiple data sources within an ethnographic design ensured that quantitative health outcomes data were interpreted within a contextualized understanding of the remote First Nations community.The sample comprised the charts of 65 mothers and 63 infants randomly selected for retrospective chart review. The findings suggest suboptimal maternal-infant health outcomes on several of the health indicator criteria identified for the purposes of this study. The authors discuss long-term sequelae of prenatal and infant health in terms of diabetes and other chronic health conditions in First Nations populations.They explore the implications of these findings in relation to nurses' preparation to offer prenatal and infant primary care in remote First Nations communities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.