Integration of CENA practice standards for postgraduate emergency nursing assessment

The use of professional competency standards to assess postgraduate nursing student’s clinical performance has been in place since 2004, at the Queensland University of Technology, School of Nursing & Midwifery (SONAM) when the Graduate Certificate in Emergency Nursing degree commenced. Emergency nursing students were assessed in their workplace, using a Clinical Performance Appraisal Tool or CPAT which was based on the Australian College of Critical Care Nurses (ACCCN) Competency Standards. With the subsequent formation of a separate Emergency Nursing Course advisory group in 2007, there was a review of clinical assessment course component. The release of the 2008 CENA revised Practice Standards for the Emergency Nursing Specialist’s, led to the emergency nursing course advisory committee supporting the integration of the CENA practice standards for assessment of emergency nurses in preference to the less relevant ACCCN competency standards. The SONAM emergency nursing study area team commenced the phasing in and progression of the CENA practice standards across the two Graduate Certificate units, and Graduate Diploma and Master of Nursing (emergency) clinical major options in 2009. As some units undertaken in the degree are available to nurses in other disciplines a separate CPAT was devised for the clinical assessments according to speciality context. The team has had to carefully consider how the professional standards are integrated into the teaching and assessment of the unit and not just applied instead of the ACCCN competency standards. Professional standards for the emergency context has also helped tailor course content and learning outcomes to be relevant across a number of emergency nursing contexts in Australia. The assessment of the CPAT is undertaken at the workplace by QUT appointed clinical lecturers. Clinical lecturers need to apply and have suitable postgraduate qualification to undertake the position. The clinical lecturer support role is well established at QUT. The integration of the new CENA practice standards has necessitated a review of the postgraduate assessment of emergency nurses. A clinical lecturer workshop has been organised to review role, scope and how to utilise the new look CENA based CPAT, clinical assessment format.

Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza Outbreak in Australia: Impact on Emergency Departments.

Executive summary Objective: The aims of this study were to identify the impact of Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza on Australian Emergency Departments (EDs) and their staff, and to inform planning, preparedness, and response management arrangements for future pandemics, as well as managing infectious patients presenting to EDs in everyday practice. Methods This study involved three elements: 1. The first element of the study was an examination of published material including published statistics. Standard literature research methods were used to identify relevant published articles. In addition, data about ED demand was obtained from Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) publications, with several state health departments providing more detailed data. 2. The second element of the study was a survey of Directors of Emergency Medicine identified with the assistance of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM). This survey retrieved data about demand for ED services and elicited qualitative comments on the impact of the pandemic on ED management. 3. The third element of the study was a survey of ED staff. A questionnaire was emailed to members of three professional colleges—the ACEM; the Australian College of Emergency Nursing (ACEN); and the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA). The overall response rate for the survey was 18.4%, with 618 usable responses from 3355 distributed questionnaires. Topics covered by the survey included ED conditions during the (H1N1) 2009 influenza pandemic; information received about Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza; pandemic plans; the impact of the pandemic on ED staff with respect to stress; illness prevention measures; support received from others in work role; staff and others’ illness during the pandemic; other factors causing ED staff to miss work during the pandemic; and vaccination against Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analysed. Results: The results obtained from Directors of Emergency Medicine quantifying the impact of the pandemic were too limited for interpretation. Data sourced from health departments and published sources demonstrated an increase in influenza-like illness (ILI) presentations of between one and a half and three times the normal level of presentations of ILIs. Directors of Emergency Medicine reported a reasonable level of preparation for the pandemic, with most reporting the use of pandemic plans that translated into relatively effective operational infection control responses. Directors reported a highly significant impact on EDs and their staff from the pandemic. Growth in demand and related ED congestion were highly significant factors causing distress within the departments. Most (64%) respondents established a ‘flu clinic’ either as part of Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza Outbreak in Australia: Impact on Emergency Departments. the ED operations or external to it. They did not note a significantly higher rate of sick leave than usual. Responses relating to the impact on staff were proportional to the size of the colleges. Most respondents felt strongly that Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza had a significant impact on demand in their ED, with most patients having low levels of clinical urgency. Most respondents felt that the pandemic had a negative impact on the care of other patients, and 94% revealed some increase in stress due to lack of space for patients, increased demand, and filling staff deficits. Levels of concern about themselves or their family members contracting the illness were less significant than expected. Nurses displayed significantly higher levels of stress overall, particularly in relation to skill-mix requirements, lack of supplies and equipment, and patient and patients’ family aggression. More than one-third of respondents became ill with an ILI. Whilst respondents themselves reported taking low levels of sick leave, respondents cited difficulties with replacing absent staff. Ranked from highest to lowest, respondents gained useful support from ED colleagues, ED administration, their hospital occupational health department, hospital administration, professional colleges, state health department, and their unions. Respondents were generally positive about the information they received overall; however, the volume of information was considered excessive and sometimes inconsistent. The media was criticised as scaremongering and sensationalist and as being the cause of many unnecessary presentations to EDs. Of concern to the investigators was that a large proportion (43%) of respondents did not know whether a pandemic plan existed for their department or hospital. A small number of staff reported being redeployed from their usual workplace for personal risk factors or operational reasons. As at the time of survey (29 October –18 December 2009), 26% of ED staff reported being vaccinated against Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza. Of those not vaccinated, half indicated they would ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ not get vaccinated, with the main reasons being the vaccine was ‘rushed into production’, ‘not properly tested’, ‘came out too late’, or not needed due to prior infection or exposure, or due to the mildness of the disease. Conclusion: Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza had a significant impact on Australian Emergency Departments. The pandemic exposed problems in existing plans, particularly a lack of guidelines, general information overload, and confusion due to the lack of a single authoritative information source. Of concern was the high proportion of respondents who did not know if their hospital or department had a pandemic plan. Nationally, the pandemic communication strategy needs a detailed review, with more engagement with media networks to encourage responsible and consistent reporting. Also of concern was the low level of immunisation, and the low level of intention to accept vaccination. This is a problem seen in many previous studies relating to seasonal influenza and health care workers. The design of EDs needs to be addressed to better manage infectious patients. Significant workforce issues were confronted in this pandemic, including maintaining appropriate staffing levels; staff exposure to illness; access to, and appropriate use of, personal protective equipment (PPE); and the difficulties associated with working in PPE for prolonged periods. An administrative issue of note was the reporting requirement, which created considerable additional stress for staff within EDs. Peer and local support strategies helped ensure staff felt their needs were provided for, creating resilience, dependability, and stability in the ED workforce. Policies regarding the establishment of flu clinics need to be reviewed. The ability to create surge capacity within EDs by considering staffing, equipment, physical space, and stores is of primary importance for future pandemics.

The experience of forging new emergency nursing curriculum development, through a course advisory network

Queensland University of Technology (QUT), School of Nursing (SoN), has offered a postgraduate Graduate Certificate in Emergency Nursing since 2003, for registered nurses practising in an emergency clinical area, who fulfil key entry criteria. Feedback from industry partners and students evidenced support for flexible and extended study pathways in emergency nursing. Therefore, in the context of a growing demand for emergency health services and the need for specialist qualified staff, it was timely to review and redevelop our emergency specialist nursing courses. The QUT postgraduate emergency nursing study area is supported by a course advisory group, whose aim is to provide input and focus development of current and future course planning. All members of the course advisory were invited to form an expert panel to review current emergency course documents. A half day “brainstorm session”, planning and development workshop was held to review the emergency courses to implement changes from 2009. Results from the expert panel planning day include: proposal for a new emergency specialty unit; incorporation of the College of Emergency Nurses (CENA) Standards for Emergency Nursing Specialist in clinical assessment; modification of the present core emergency unit; enhancing the focus of the two other units that emergency students undertake; and opening the emergency study area to the Graduate Diploma in Nursing (Emergency Nursing) and Master of Nursing (Emergency Nursing). The conclusion of the brainstorm session resulted in a clearer conceptualisation, of the study pathway for students. Overall, the expert panel group of enthusiastic emergency educators and clinicians provided viable options for extending the career progression opportunities for emergency nurses. In concluding, the opportunity for collaboration across university and clinical settings has resulted in the design of a course with exciting potential and strong clinical relevance.