The diffusion of Magnet hospital recognition

Abraham, Jean M.; Jerome-D’Emilia, Bonnie; Begun, James W.

doi:10.1097/hmr.0b013e318219cd27

Cited by 25 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The former relationship also accords with Abraham and colleagues’ (2011) cross-sectional look at Magnet adoption. 26 We also see that investing in Magnet recognition is a strategic process that evolves in response to the dynamic behavior of local competitors, and our results reveal differences in behavior based on a hospital’s standing within its market. Magnet recognition and maintaining Magnet standing constitute significant financial investments for hospitals that must be weighed against the uncertain future financial benefits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

A Race to the Top? Competitive Pressure and Magnet Adoption Among US Hospitals 1997–2012

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Care quality continues to be a focal point within US health care. One quality innovation is the Magnet recognition program for hospitals, which is a nurse-driven initiative emphasizing care and patient safety improvements. To date, Magnet hospitals have been associated with better outcomes, but their distribution is highly uneven. Relatedly, little research has characterized what factors drive Magnet adoption (e.g., competitive pressure from other hospitals). Objective To examine if hospitals respond to more competing hospitals becoming Magnets by also becoming Magnet institutions. Research Design We use longitudinal data from the American Hospital Association, 1997 – 2012, and estimate hospital-level fixed effect regressions to capture the association between Magnet adoption among competitors and a hospital’s own likelihood of becoming a Magnet. We also explore heterogeneity in the relationships according to a hospital’s standing within its market. Results Having more competitors become Magnets strongly predicts that a given hospital seeks Magnet recognition; yet, a hospital’s market position and prevailing competition levels are moderating influences. Conclusions A large literature links Magnet hospitals with better outcomes for patients and nurses, and more recent evidence suggests a business case for becoming a Magnet. We find evidence that hospitals appear motivated by competitive pressure, which suggests economic considerations in the decision to invest in costly care improvements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

A Race to the Top? Competitive Pressure and Magnet Adoption Among US Hospitals 1997–2012

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The selection of Magnet hospital nursing programs for this study was strategic because they are expected to be positioned to identify innovative solutions to current competency work-force issues regarding genomics (Abraham, Jerome-D'Emilia, & Begun, 2011). As established leaders in the nursing practice environment, Magnet hospital nurses have the potential to exemplify possible change initiatives, generate outcome evidence associated with change strategies, and lead the way to improving and adding necessary complex nursing competencies and the infrastructure for successful integration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing a New Competency Into Nursing Practice

Calzone

Jenkins

Culp

et al. 2014

Journal of Nursing Regulation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As science advances, new competencies must be integrated into nursing practice to ensure the provision of safe, responsible, and accountable care. This article utilizes a model for integrating a new complex competency into nursing practice, using genomics as the exemplar competency. Nurses working at 23 Magnet® Recognition Program hospitals participated in a 1-year new competency integration effort.The aim of the study was to evaluate nursing workforce attitudes, receptivity, confidence, competency, knowledge, and practices regarding genomics. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques. Respondents were 7,798 licensed registered nurses. The majority (89%) said it was very or somewhat important for nurses to become more educated in the genetics of common diseases. Overall, the respondents felt genomics was important, but a genomic nursing competency deficit affecting all nurses regardless of academic preparation or role was observed. The study findings provide essential information to help guide the integration of a new competency into nursing practice.

show abstract

“…Thus, it may not be easy to differentiate a health care organization by a single variable, nor may a single variable adequately represent the effect of organizational certification. Other studies have assessed additional hospital characteristics, such as work environment (McHugh et al, 2013), nurse staffing and education (Aiken et al, 2011), hospital size, ownership, resources, and teaching status (Abraham et al, 2011;Powers and Sanders, 2013), in order to determine the differences among hospitals that opted for Magnet recognition.…”

Section: Meaningful Credentialing Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Significance of Data Harmonization for Credentialing Research

Hughes¹,

Beene²,

Dykes³

2014

NAM Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving the quality of health care requires going beyond the basic standards for health care organizations and formal clinician education. One potential strategy to improve health care quality is credentialing. Credentialing describes specific processes that involve licensure, certification, registration, and accreditation (NOCA, 2005; Styles and Affara, 1998). Currently, only limited information is available about the relationship between credentialing and the quality of care, practice, or patient outcomes. The path to building credentialing evidence is difficult. This is because the process of working toward and having certain credentials may support clinical decision making and the goals of quality, safety, and efficiency of health care (Hickey et al., 2014), while the process of attaining or possessing a credential may serve as a mediating, moderating, or modifying variable in research analyses. Credentialing requirements for individual health care clinicians and health care organizations vary (Kendall-Gallagher and Blegen, 2009), as do evaluation processes and the type of data collected for different credentialing programs. Several organizations are involved in credentialing programs, including the National Committee for Quality Assurance, the Joint Commission, URAC (formerly known as the Utilization Review Accreditation Commission), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). These programs oversee credentialing and qualification standards for health care organizations and individual clinicians. Organizations that manage credentialing processes typically evaluate the training and skill level of individuals and organizations, as well as their capacity to meet certain standards (ICN, 2009). However, each organization sets the standards for the elements within their respective credentialing program, and determines which data elements are to be collected, maintained, and updated. Similar data are not available for organizations and individuals without credentials. As a result, scientists lack both the data and the data harmonization required to determine the impact of credentialing in general, or to compare the impact of specific credentials on individual and organizational outcomes. Progress in credentialing research is currently obstructed by datasets that are both insufficiently accessible and inadequately standardized across credential types and credentialing organizations. To gain an understanding of the impact credentialing has on health care organizations, patients, and clinicians, researchers must have access to data that are standardized, accessible, and up to date, as well as defined and consistently structured. Additionally, data must report on organizations and individuals with and without credentials or credentialing programs. Data that meet these criteria can be used to identify trends, enable decision making, and permit the analysis of outcomes. Research findings based on data that do not meet these criteria will be inconclusive, as it will be impossible to distinguish between results ...

show abstract

The diffusion of Magnet hospital recognition

Cited by 25 publications

References 18 publications

A Race to the Top? Competitive Pressure and Magnet Adoption Among US Hospitals 1997–2012

A Race to the Top? Competitive Pressure and Magnet Adoption Among US Hospitals 1997–2012

Introducing a New Competency Into Nursing Practice

The Significance of Data Harmonization for Credentialing Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About