4.5 Article

An Integrative Review of Expert Nursing Practice

Journal

JOURNAL OF NURSING SCHOLARSHIP
Volume 43, Issue 2, Pages 163-170

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2011.01398.x

Keywords

Expert nursing practice

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To review relevant literature on expert practice in nursing to assess common characteristics across the breadth of nursing specialties and work settings. Organizing Construct: An integrative literature search was conducted with inclusion criteria: (a) primary studies of how clinical staff nurses develop and demonstrate expert practice; (b) subjects from variety of specialties, employment settings, and countries of origin; and (c) studies of clinical staff nurses and not nurses in advanced practice roles. Methods: Literature published between 1996 and 2009 was reviewed using MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) using the key words nursing, expert, and practice. Findings: The characteristics of expert practice as explicated across a variety of specialty areas of practice and international settings included the following: knowing the patient, intuitive knowledge, reflective practice, risk taking, and skilled know-how. Involvement and engagement of the expert nurse with her or his patients underpin these characteristics. Themes were illustrated in a star model of nursing expert practice surrounded by support and grounded in emotional involvement. Conclusions: Expert practice develops as nurses gain experience in a specialized practice setting, reflect on and learn from their experience, and develop meaningful relationships with their patients, families, and colleagues. Clinical Relevance: The findings provide an understanding of expert nursing practice that can serve as a foundation for efforts to transfer knowledge from expert nurses to less expert nurses in all practice settings to reduce the expertise gap that is now widening.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available