Nurse clinician-scientists are increasingly expected to show leadership aimed at transforming healthcare. However, research on nurse clinician-scientists' leadership (integrating researcher and practitioner roles) is scarce and hardly embedded in sociohistorical contexts. This study introduces leadership moments, that is, concrete events in practices that are perceived as acts of empowerment, in order to understand leadership in the daily work of newly appointed nurse clinician-scientists. Following the learning history method we gathered data using multiple (qualitative) methods to get close to their daily practices. A document analysis provided us with insight into the history of nursing science to illustrate how leadership moments in the everyday work of nurse clinician-scientists in the “here and now” can be related to the particular histories from which they emerged. A qualitative analysis led to three acts of empowerment: (1) becoming visible, (2) building networks, and (3) getting wired in. These acts are illustrated with three series of events in which nurse clinician-scientists' leadership becomes visible. This study contributes to a more socially embedded understanding of nursing leadership, enables us to get a grip on crucial leadership moments, and provides academic and practical starting points for strengthening nurse clinician-scientists' leadership practices. Transformations in healthcare call for transformed notions of leadership.
MULTIFILE
Objectives To determine nurse-sensitive outcomes in district nursing care for community-living older people. Nurse-sensitive outcomes are defined as patient outcomes that are relevant based on nurses’ scope and domain of practice and that are influenced by nursing inputs and interventions. Design A Delphi study following the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method with two rounds of data collection. Setting District nursing care in the community care setting in the Netherlands. Participants Experts with current or recent clinical experience as district nurses as well as expertise in research, teaching, practice, or policy in the area of district nursing. Main outcome measures Experts assessed potential nurse-sensitive outcomes for their sensitivity to nursing care by scoring the relevance of each outcome and the ability of the outcome to be influenced by nursing care (influenceability). The relevance and influenceability of each outcome were scored on a nine-point Likert scale. A group median of 7 to 9 indicated that the outcome was assessed as relevant and/or influenceable. To measure agreement among experts, the disagreement index was used, with a score of <1 indicating agreement. Results In Delphi round two, 11 experts assessed 46 outcomes. In total, 26 outcomes (56.5%) were assessed as nurse-sensitive. The nurse-sensitive outcomes with the highest median scores for both relevance and influenceability were the patient’s autonomy, the patient’s ability to make decisions regarding the provision of care, the patient’s satisfaction with delivered district nursing care, the quality of dying and death, and the compliance of the patient with needed care. Conclusions This study determined 26 nurse-sensitive outcomes for district nursing care for community-living older people based on the collective opinion of experts in district nursing care. This insight could guide the development of quality indicators for district nursing care. Further research is needed to operationalise the outcomes and to determine which outcomes are relevant for specific subgroups.
Most nurse leadership studies have concentrated on a classical, heroic, and hierarchical view of leadership. However, critical leadership studies have argued the need for more insight into leadership in daily nursing practices. Nurses must align their professional standards and opinions on quality of care with those of other professionals, management, and patients. They want to achieve better outcomes for their patients but also feel disciplined and controlled. To deal with this, nurses challenge the status quo by showing rebel nurse leadership. In this paper, we describe 47 nurses’ experiences with rebel nurse leadership from a leadership-as-practice perspective. In eight focus groups, nurses from two hospitals and one long-term care organization shared their experiences of rebel nurse leadership practices. They illustrated the differences between “bad” and “good” rebels. Knowledge, work experience, and patient-driven motivation were considered necessary for “good” rebel leadership. The participants also explained that continuous social influencing is important while exploring and challenging the boundaries set by colleagues and management. Credibility, trust, autonomy, freedom, and preserving relationships determined whether rebel nurses acted visibly or invisibly. Ultimately, this study refines the concept of rebel nurse leadership, gives a better understanding of how this occurs in nursing practice, and give insights into the challenges faced when studying nursing leadership practices.
MULTIFILE
