John Thompson , Dianne Crellin , Sharon Kinney , Sue Matthews , Marie Gerdtz
{"title":"Metrics used by nurse practitioners to evaluate the impact of their role: A scoping review","authors":"John Thompson , Dianne Crellin , Sharon Kinney , Sue Matthews , Marie Gerdtz","doi":"10.1016/j.colegn.2025.04.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The link between the care provided by nurse practitioners and its impact on patient outcomes is not clear.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To identify what metrics are currently being used by nurse practitioners to evaluate their practice.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Scoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The population, concept, and context framework was used to guide keyword and index terms used. Metrics used to evaluate nurse practitioner practice and methods used in quantitative and qualitative studies, published in English between 2017 and 2023, were included. A content analysis was performed to identify metrics common to all nurse practitioners.</div></div><div><h3>Data sources</h3><div>Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and the Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-Based Practice Database were searched in July 2024. Grey literature was identified by searching Open Dissertations and Google Scholar.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 2742 articles identified, 83 met the aim of this review. Most publications originated from the United States (n=46). No studies indicated consumer involvement in study design. Data analysis of the 294 metrics identified 17 themes. All themes were aligned to Donabedian’s categories of <em>structure</em> (n=2), <em>process</em> (n=9), and <em>outcome</em> (n=6).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Nurse practitioners are evaluating their specialty practice using a variety of metrics via quality assurance and observational design where the comparator is medicine. A lack of consumer involvement in practice evaluation was noted in this review. Metrics, co-designed with consumers, that measure nurse practitioner practice regardless of specialty is lacking throughout the literature and is desperately needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55241,"journal":{"name":"Collegian","volume":"32 4","pages":"Pages 183-194"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collegian","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1322769625000307","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
The link between the care provided by nurse practitioners and its impact on patient outcomes is not clear.
Aim
To identify what metrics are currently being used by nurse practitioners to evaluate their practice.
Design
Scoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.
Methods
The population, concept, and context framework was used to guide keyword and index terms used. Metrics used to evaluate nurse practitioner practice and methods used in quantitative and qualitative studies, published in English between 2017 and 2023, were included. A content analysis was performed to identify metrics common to all nurse practitioners.
Data sources
Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and the Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-Based Practice Database were searched in July 2024. Grey literature was identified by searching Open Dissertations and Google Scholar.
Results
Of the 2742 articles identified, 83 met the aim of this review. Most publications originated from the United States (n=46). No studies indicated consumer involvement in study design. Data analysis of the 294 metrics identified 17 themes. All themes were aligned to Donabedian’s categories of structure (n=2), process (n=9), and outcome (n=6).
Conclusions
Nurse practitioners are evaluating their specialty practice using a variety of metrics via quality assurance and observational design where the comparator is medicine. A lack of consumer involvement in practice evaluation was noted in this review. Metrics, co-designed with consumers, that measure nurse practitioner practice regardless of specialty is lacking throughout the literature and is desperately needed.
期刊介绍:
Collegian: The Australian Journal of Nursing Practice, Scholarship and Research is the official journal of Australian College of Nursing (ACN).
The journal aims to reflect the broad interests of nurses and the nursing profession, and to challenge nurses on emerging areas of interest. It publishes research articles and scholarly discussion of nursing practice, policy and professional issues.
Papers published in the journal are peer reviewed by a double blind process using reviewers who meet high standards of academic and clinical expertise. Invited papers that contribute to nursing knowledge and debate are published at the discretion of the Editor.
The journal, online only from 2016, is available to members of ACN and also by separate subscription.
ACN believes that each and every nurse in Australia should have the opportunity to grow their career through quality education, and further our profession through representation. ACN is the voice of influence, providing the nursing expertise and experience required when government and key stakeholders are deciding the future of health.