|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|2667925||1140953||2016||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود کنید|
• Sustained engagement is needed to strengthen nursing's impact in the policy arena.
• Leadership views of two regional professional nursing organizations are presented.
• Engagement, cohesion, mentoring, and accomplishment sustain public policy advocacy.
• Less emphasis on advocacy in academics and employment challenge sustained advocacy.
• Employer, nursing organization, and academic collaborations may sustain advocacy.
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to elicit insight from the public policy leaders of 2 regional professional nursing organizations on key qualities of their current advocacy initiatives that motivate nurses to sustain momentum in public policy advocacy beyond a single episode. The goal is to inform quality improvement in the development of future advocacy initiatives to increase sustained engagement of nurses.MethodsSocial cognitive theory was used as the rationale for this qualitative, descriptive study. A purposive convenience sample of executive leadership and board committee members from 2 regional professional nursing organizations were recruited to complete an initial Web-based electronic survey, followed by separate semistructured interview focus groups. One organization was composed primarily of advanced practice registered nurses, and the other group composed of diverse, multispecialty nursing members with varied educational levels.ResultsNine themes emerged, categorized as facilitators or challenges to the positive impact of advocacy initiatives on nurses' motivation.ConclusionHighlighting and marketing facilitators to the positive impact of advocacy initiatives on nurses' motivation to sustain momentum in public policy advocacy, while designing and testing new initiatives that address the challenges, may increase the number of nurses who sustain engagement in the policy advocacy process.
Journal: Journal of Professional Nursing - Volume 32, Issue 3, May–June 2016, Pages 235–245