TY - JOUR
T1 - A global perspective of advanced practice nursing research
T2 - A review of systematic reviews
AU - Kilpatrick, Kelley
AU - Savard, Isabelle
AU - Audet, Li-Anne
AU - Constanzo, Gina
AU - Khan, Mariam
AU - Atallah, Renée
AU - Jabbour, Mira
AU - Zhou, Wentao
AU - Wheeler, Kathy
AU - Ladd, Elissa
AU - Gray, Deborah C.
AU - Henderson, Colette
AU - Spies, Lori
AU - McGrath, Heather
AU - Rogers, Melanie
N1 - Funding Information:
This work is supported by the McGill University Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences and the Newton Foundation via the Susan E. French Chair in Nursing Research and Innovative Practice held by KK. KK is also supported by a Fonds de recherche du Qu\u00E9bec-Sant\u00E9 (https://frq. gouv.qc.ca/en/health/) Research Scholar Senior (Award Number 298573) salary award. There was no additional external funding received for this study, and the authors received no specific funding for this work. All the funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The collaborative effort of the International Council of Nurses Nurse Practitioner Advanced Practice Nurse Network (ICN NP/APNN) is exemplified in this work, with significant contributions made by several ICN NP/APNN members.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright: © 2024 Kilpatrick et al.
PY - 2024/7/2
Y1 - 2024/7/2
N2 - Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) called for the expansion of all nursing roles, including advanced practice nurses (APNs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs). A clearer understanding of the impact of these roles will inform global priorities for advanced practice nursing education, research, and policy. Objective To identify gaps in advanced practice nursing research globally. Materials and methods A review of systematic reviews was conducted. We searched CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, Healthstar, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, DARE, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP, and Web of Science from January 2011 onwards, with no restrictions on jurisdiction or language. Grey literature and hand searches of reference lists were undertaken. Review quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). Study selection, data extraction and CASP assessments were done independently by two reviewers. We extracted study characteristics, country and outcome data. Data were summarized using narrative synthesis. Results We screened 5840 articles and retained 117 systematic reviews, representing 38 countries. Most CASP criteria were met. However, study selection by two reviewers was done inconsistently and language and geographical restrictions were applied. We found highly consistent evidence that APN, NP and CNS care was equal or superior to the comparator (e.g., physicians) for 29 indicator categories across a wide range of clinical settings, patient populations and acuity levels. Mixed findings were noted for quality of life, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, and health care service delivery where some studies favoured the control groups. No indicator consistently favoured the control group. There is emerging research related to Artificial Intelligence (AI). Conclusion There is a large body of advanced practice nursing research globally, but several WHO regions are underrepresented. Identified research gaps include AI, interprofessional team functioning, workload, and patients and families as partners in healthcare.
AB - Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) called for the expansion of all nursing roles, including advanced practice nurses (APNs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs). A clearer understanding of the impact of these roles will inform global priorities for advanced practice nursing education, research, and policy. Objective To identify gaps in advanced practice nursing research globally. Materials and methods A review of systematic reviews was conducted. We searched CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, Healthstar, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, DARE, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP, and Web of Science from January 2011 onwards, with no restrictions on jurisdiction or language. Grey literature and hand searches of reference lists were undertaken. Review quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). Study selection, data extraction and CASP assessments were done independently by two reviewers. We extracted study characteristics, country and outcome data. Data were summarized using narrative synthesis. Results We screened 5840 articles and retained 117 systematic reviews, representing 38 countries. Most CASP criteria were met. However, study selection by two reviewers was done inconsistently and language and geographical restrictions were applied. We found highly consistent evidence that APN, NP and CNS care was equal or superior to the comparator (e.g., physicians) for 29 indicator categories across a wide range of clinical settings, patient populations and acuity levels. Mixed findings were noted for quality of life, consultations, costs, emergency room visits, and health care service delivery where some studies favoured the control groups. No indicator consistently favoured the control group. There is emerging research related to Artificial Intelligence (AI). Conclusion There is a large body of advanced practice nursing research globally, but several WHO regions are underrepresented. Identified research gaps include AI, interprofessional team functioning, workload, and patients and families as partners in healthcare.
KW - systematic review
KW - advanced practice nurse
KW - global
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85197652583&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0305008
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0305008
M3 - Review article
VL - 19
JO - PLoS One
JF - PLoS One
SN - 1932-6203
IS - 7
M1 - e0305008
ER -
