Lisa J Sundean1, E Carol Polifroni2, Kathryn Libal3, Jacqueline M McGrath4. 1. School of Nursing, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. Electronic address: Lisa.sundean@uconn.edu. 2. School of Nursing, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. 3. Human Rights Institute, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. 4. School of Nursing, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT; Connecticut Children's Medical Center, Hartford, CT.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nurses are key change agents in health care; yet, nurses have not been sufficiently engaged on boards to shape decision making. Without an equal voice in the boardroom, nurses cannot fulfill their professional obligation to society. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to understand the progression in research focus and recommendations over time about nurses on boards (NOB), identify research gaps, and make research/practice recommendations. METHODS: An integrative review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2009) for data evaluation and analysis. Eleven studies (six quantitative, three qualitative, and two quasi-mixed methods) were included in the review. FINDINGS: The focus/recommendations of research about NOB have changed from passive observation to action-oriented inquiry that considers nurse expertise and value but lacks a coordinated approach to advance board appointments for nurses. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach to the research is needed to advance NOB as key agents in health care transformation and social justice.
BACKGROUND: Nurses are key change agents in health care; yet, nurses have not been sufficiently engaged on boards to shape decision making. Without an equal voice in the boardroom, nurses cannot fulfill their professional obligation to society. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to understand the progression in research focus and recommendations over time about nurses on boards (NOB), identify research gaps, and make research/practice recommendations. METHODS: An integrative review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2009) for data evaluation and analysis. Eleven studies (six quantitative, three qualitative, and two quasi-mixed methods) were included in the review. FINDINGS: The focus/recommendations of research about NOB have changed from passive observation to action-oriented inquiry that considers nurse expertise and value but lacks a coordinated approach to advance board appointments for nurses. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach to the research is needed to advance NOB as key agents in health care transformation and social justice.