Creating Care Protocol for Kidney Patients

spring 2019 bY erin julius

A study titled the Pathways Project may ultimately impact as many as 100,000 kidney patients in the United States.

GW Nursing’s Dale Lupu is co-principal investigator on a $2.4 million grant aimed at improving the quality of care for seriously ill patients who have kidney disease.

“This project will find ways they can have better support and care through the entire course of illness. It’s not only about dying; it’s about making the care more patient-centered from the moment of diagnosis,” said Dr. Lupu, an associate research professor.

Kidney patients in the U.S. face a deficit in supportive care, also known as palliative care. They are rarely offered alternatives to dialysis, which may not extend life for patients already frail from other conditions. Instead, they often face obstacles if they say that they value quality of life or wish for a peaceful death rather than multiple trips to the hospital and ICU at the end of life. Families of dialysis patients rate the quality of their loved ones’ end-of-life care worse than families of those with cancer and other chronic conditions. The Pathways Project seeks to change that.

While other countries offer disease management for end-of-life renal patients without dialysis, treatment in the U.S. has typically been more aggressive.

The second phase of the Pathways Project, based at GW Nursing in collaboration with West Virginia University, began in November 2018 and focuses on the implementation of best practices. This phase will address the project’s central research question of whether a quality improvement approach to spreading supportive care best practices at dialysis centers and affiliated clinics will measurably increase the provision of supportive care best practices.

“We are so pleased that the Pathways Project has found a home here at GW Nursing. This important research will make a positive impact on kidney patients and their families,” said Dean Pamela Jeffries.

Experts have put out a number of guidelines and articles calling for more supportive kidney care, Dr. Lupu said. Now health care providers will figure out how to implement them, she said.

“It’s about the nitty-gritty details of making new models of care and of figuring out what actually works to deliver more patient-centered care,” Dr. Lupu said. 

“We are working with the leading dialysis centers and teams in their communities,” said Dr. Lupu. “These are centers that are willing to innovate, to risk trying something new.”

Findings from the Pathways Project will also be relevant for other specialties, such as cardiology, that seek to include more primary palliative care into their care models.

The Pathways Project is the first attempt to implement supportive care at multiple sites in the United States. Other countries including Canada, Australia and Great Britain are implementing supportive care.

In the first phase, the Pathways Project developed 14 evidence-based best practice recommendations designed to improve supportive care delivery for patients with kidney disease. A technical expert panel defined the ideal care system for seriously ill patients with kidney disease. 

In this ideal patient-centered system, patient preferences, goals and values are discussed and respected, patients receive treatment in keeping with their goals, and patients and families receive support, resources and assistance to help them prepare for end-of-life care.

The Pathways Project is funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

Exploring New Avenues in Advanced Practice Nursing Education

simulation lab photos overlaid by advanced practice ahead yield sign

A growing and aging population, large numbers of students and competition for clinical sites have created a “traffic jam” in advanced practice nursing (APN) education. At the same time, with a growing provider shortage, it’s more important than ever that the profession efficiently produces well-prepared providers.

GW Nursing Dean Pamela Jeffries describes the state of nurse practitioner (NP) education as a “traffic jam” due to the lack of available clinical sites and the larger number of NP students compared to medical students. Many nursing leaders across the nation this year have taken steps to clear the roads, turning to simulation to supplement clinical education hours as another avenue to provide the clinical practice hours and competency testing for NP students. While accrediting organizations require that NP students undertake a minimum of 500 direct patient care clinical hours to prepare for their future role, many programs require hundreds more clinical hours. Simulation offers a way to clear congestion at clinical sites while ensuring students are prepared to deliver high-quality care.

 Health care simulation experts from professional organizations, schools and technology companies gathered in January of this year in Washington, D.C., to discuss how best to evaluate health care simulation in NP programs.

Hosted by the National Organization for Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF) and GW Nursing, the Thought Leaders’ Summit on Simulation in NP Education examined existing evidence, discussed the challenges of evaluation and began formulating next steps.

Then in March, more than 100 nursing educators attended GW Nursing’s second annual simulation conference, which this year focused on simulation in NP education.

State of the science

While a framework for the effective use of simulation is established at the pre-licensure nursing level, little evidence exists regarding simulation’s use in APN programs. 

NP education is fundamentally different from pre-licensure education and requires an entirely different approach from the established framework at the undergraduate level, said Mary Beth Bigley, CEO of NONPF.

“When we get to this level of education, standardized patient encounters have more value because it evaluates those higher-level skills,” Dr. Bigley said.

Carla Nye, clinical associate professor at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing, and Suzanne Campbell, associate professor at The University of British Columbia School of Nursing, previously surveyed the research related to simulation in NP education. Their examination of literature produced between 2010 and April 2015 found that a minimal number of research studies had been completed, the quality of studies was low, the studies used small sample sizes, the use of existing International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL) standards wasn’t known and there was a lack of standardized scenarios. An update of their work looking at research published between 2015 and 2019 did not show much improvement in the state of the science, Drs. Nye and Campbell said.

Despite its flaws, the existing body of research does offer promising outcomes, according to Drs. Nye and Campbell: Students like simulation and see its value; students self-report more confidence; simulation learning can be transferred to clinical settings; and simulation can improve communication skills. 

Drs. Nye and Campbell also conducted their own inquiry to describe the current use of simulation in advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) programs. The study was born of the research arm of a Simulation in Advanced Practice Nursing Task Force organized after discussions about APN simulation at the 2016 INACSL annual conference. 

Results of a descriptive survey sent to all APN programs in the United States and Canada show that a majority of the programs employed simulation up to 20 hours, with participants reporting a wide range of zero to more than 100 hours. Simulation is most frequently implemented in physical assessment courses, their survey showed, but it was also used in many other courses.

Schools most frequently reported using standardized patients (SPs), but the use of manikins, computer and virtual simulation, task trainers, interprofessional simulation, video recording and distance/telehealth was also reported. 

This survey also showed that 98 percent of respondents reported using simulation in their APN programs, and 77 percent of respondents supported the replacement of some percentage of clinical hours with simulation. Drs. Nye and Campbell stressed survey participants who chose to complete the survey may have a pro-simulation bias.

When we get to this level of education,
standardized patient encounters have more value because it evaluates those higher-level skills.”

Mary Beth Bigley

Barriers

The survey study conducted by Drs. Nye and Campbell found that faculty skill and staff support were the most reported barriers to simulation use. Programs reported additional barriers to simulation use in APN programs, such as an inconsistent course-by-course approach to simulation, an increase in student fees to pay for resources, competition with undergraduate simulation resources and distance education. 

In small working groups, summit attendees identified forces that inhibit the adoption of simulation in achieving NP competencies. Lack of resources and equity of resources between programs led the list, with limited faculty knowledge and skills and a dearth of peer-reviewed literature also emerging as major areas of concern.

Educators evaluate an NP student’s ability to obtain a patient health history, conduct a physical exam, work through a diagnosis and create a management plan. All of these skills are based on critical thinking rather than manual skills, Dr. Bigley said.

Standardized patients are considered the highest-fidelity level of simulation, but the resources required to both train and pay SPs were repeatedly cited as a barrier. 

NP education is already undergoing a major shift, with programs working toward compliance with the goal of a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) as the entry to practice by 2025. 

“NONPF is committed to the DNP as the entry degree by 2025. NP practice should be at the DNP level,” said Lorna Finnegan, executive associate dean at the University of Illinois at Chicago and NONPF president.

Need for adoption

Despite the challenges and complications, NP educators agree that simulation will only grow in its value to the field. 

Emerging evidence shows that learning does occur during simulation experiences, said Angela McNelis, associate dean for scholarship, innovation and clinical science, at GW Nursing. 

Reliance on the current precepted clinical model is a challenge to sustain or expand, so educators must focus on maximizing student time in clinical settings and exploring alternative models, she said.

The demands and technology savviness of this generation of learners dominated the summit’s discussions about the need for adoption of simulation. 

Current evidence shows that students report increased confidence, decreased anxiety and communication skills development in simulation scenarios, Dr. McNelis said. 

Faculty members who work closely with students know that simulation works, said Pamela Slaven-Lee, senior associate dean for academic affairs at GW Nursing. “We’re in the rooms with the students, and we see the light bulb come on. We see the learning, we know it’s happening, and we need the research so we can move forward. Our undergraduate colleagues are ahead of us,” Dr. Slaven-Lee said.

Current students are digital natives, Christine Pintz, professor at GW Nursing, said during the panel presentation at the March conference. “These are individuals who understand the simulation process and also want this process,” she said.

Anecdotal evidence also reinforces the openness to including simulation in NP programs, with one attendee sharing that her colleagues call simulation “on-campus clinical hours.”

Moving forward

To address the need for a standardized, efficient, sustainable model for NP clinical education, a team led by Drs. Bigley and Jeffries presented their proposed study on “The Use of Simulation in Family Nurse Practitioner Education.” A white paper with a call to action regarding the need for more evidence to use simulations in NP clinical education is expected to be published later this year and should set the stage for a rigorous study. 

Evidence is needed through conducting multisite studies on NP clinical education to obtain evidence for new models of education. In the current environment, significant shortages of clinical sites, clinical preceptors and financial resources pose barriers to NP education. These barriers create an opportunity for educators to develop new models capitalizing on the strong tradition of preceptor-based clinical experiences and leveraging innovative and evidence-based simulations that meet national competencies and continue to prepare graduates for practice. As noted by Dr. Jeffries, the future can be accomplished if there is a concerted effort to generate evidence through robust and rigorous research on simulation in NP education. The current clinical model faces ongoing challenges and requires new thinking. It is time to be bold and institute new models that include evidence-based simulation. 

AUTHOR Erin julius


Simulation Is The Foundation

Simulation is the Foundation building blocks

Proponents of health care simulation education have said for years that it improves clinician performance and reduces patient safety errors, but until recently they have lacked the data and evidence to share with academic leaders and policymakers. 

Simulation education in health care has advanced rapidly in the past decade, due in large part to the efforts of nurse educators. The National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) in 2014 released the results of a landmark simulation study, which was followed up in 2015 by the publication of the National League for Nursing (NLN) Jeffries Simulation Theory. GW Nursing Dean Pamela Jeffries’ work as one of the consultants of the NCSBN study and her eponymous theory helped legitimize simulation education in pre-licensure nursing education. 

The NCSBN National Simulation Study examined the role and outcomes of simulation in pre-licensure nursing education. The study provided substantial evidence that simulation can be effectively substituted for up to 50 percent of traditional clinical experience in all pre-licensure nursing courses, under conditions comparable to high-quality, high-fidelity situations described in the study. 

The study results reaffirmed simulation education advocates’ belief in this type of experiential learning strategy while providing concrete data to address concerns held by simulation skeptics. The research team had its own skeptics—they were unsure of how well simulation could supplement traditional clinical experiences in certain areas, including mental health, pediatrics and obstetrics, but the data showed no significant differences as long as the correct simulation technique was used. 

“For me personally, it was those areas that the simulation worked for that surprised me a little, as someone who likes traditional clinical experiences,” said Nancy Spector, the NCSBN director of regulatory innovations and a consultant on the study.

Study results influence state policy

The NCSBN study marked a shift in how nursing schools and policymakers viewed simulation education. Each state’s board of nursing makes its own decisions regarding how much simulation can be used to supplement traditional clinical experiences in pre-licensure programs. After the NCSBN study was published, many states amended their policies and increased the amount of allowable simulation. “The study has had a really positive impact on what boards of nursing are allowing,” Dr. Spector said. There was no evidence before the study, so boards made arbitrary decisions regarding simulation, and some states didn’t allow any amount of simulation to be used to supplement clinical experiences. 

One year after the study was published, the NCSBN convened an expert panel to develop national simulation guidelines for pre-licensure nursing programs. These guidelines included evidence to support the use of simulation and information for faculty and program directors on how to incorporate high-quality, high-fidelity simulation in their programs. 

Since the NCSBN released these guidelines in 2015, more than half of all pre-licensure programs in the country have adopted them, according to a survey conducted by the NCSBN evaluating the simulation landscape. That survey also revealed that high-fidelity simulation use has substantially increased for almost all undergraduate courses since 2010. 

High-quality simulation fosters better student outcomes  

GW Nursing is committed to providing students with high-quality, high-fidelity experiences and has made significant investments in simulation under the direction of Dr. Jeffries, an innovator in promoting and advancing the field of simulation education. 

Recent renovations at Innovation Hall on GW’s Virginia Science and Technology Campus nearly doubled the simulation space available to nursing students. The new Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) center contains 12 patient exam rooms and two acute care rooms, bringing the total simulation space available to both undergraduate and graduate students to nearly 20,000 square feet. 

While the new OSCE space was designed for nurse practitioner students to improve their clinical skills, GW Nursing also recently invested $400,000 in upgrades to make simulation as comparable to a hospital setting as possible for undergraduate students, said Crystel Farina, the school’s director of simulation and experiential learning. Those upgrades include eight new moderate-fidelity simulators (manikins that breathe and have a pulse to practice certain skills, but with fewer features than high-fidelity manikins), new beds, IV pumps, medication dispensing machines and workstations on wheels. The school launched another renovation this spring that will add additional simulation and debriefing space, new technology, a virtual reality space and a simulated operating room.

As simulation director, Ms. Farina ensures that all of the school’s many simulation events run smoothly. Simulation is integrated throughout GW Nursing’s entire curriculum—every course has some sort of simulation experience in it, Ms. Farina said. “My role is to ensure that not only does the simulation continue, but that it’s high quality and meets the standards of best practice,” she said.

Those standards, which are set by the International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL), were developed based on the NLN Jeffries Theory and the NCSBN guidelines. Nursing schools now have a solid framework and explicit standards to guide the development of high-quality simulation experiences. While the virtues of simulation as a teaching strategy are well established, Ms. Farina and other dedicated simulation educators are quick to point out that it’s crucial that students engage in high-quality, high-fidelity simulations. When simulations are conducted improperly, or not in accordance with the guidelines and standards set forth by NCSBN and INACSL, simulation can actually be harmful to students. 

In the early days of simulation use, instructors would purposefully introduce mistakes into a simulation in the hopes that students would catch the mistake, Ms. Farina said. “We didn’t know how important it was to the students’ self-esteem and to their socialization as a nurse if they didn’t catch the mistake,” she explains. 

The NLN Jeffries Theory set forth guidelines that simulation should be collaborative and transparent—the student, simulated patient (if one is used) and faculty should know exactly what’s expected and what the objectives are. 

“There’s no way students can meet the objective if they get caught up in how to program the IV pump,” Ms. Farina said.

Schools that implement high-quality and high-fidelity simulation have seen improvements in student performance and clinical confidence. “Anecdotally, we’re seeing much better outcomes from simulation now that we have the NLN Jeffries Theory,” Ms. Farina said. “Their ability to talk with each other and other care providers is definitely enhanced. Their teamwork is also much better—they’re able to work as a team, and they don’t see things as individual tasks.” 

Dr. Jeffries’ groundbreaking work has influenced nurse educators for years, even before the publication of the NCSBN study and her eponymous theory. Jeffries’ 2007 book, “Simulation in Nursing Education”, was Kellie Bryant’s go-to resource when she was hired as the director of simulation learning at New York University College of Nursing in 2008. 

“From my experience, her book was how a lot of us got started in simulation,” Dr. Bryant said. “I’m talking over 10 years ago when there weren’t conferences or other books or journals—that book was our template for simulation.” 

In her current role as executive director of simulation at Columbia School of Nursing, Dr. Bryant is using Dr. Jeffries’ evidence-based approach to developing high-quality simulations, with a focus on creating simulation experiences that address proper medication administration. “We know that medical errors are a leading cause of mortality and death, and a component of that is giving the wrong medication or the wrong dose,” she explained. 

Dr. Bryant and her colleagues began with manikin-based simulations, then moved on to using standardized patients (actors portraying patients) for students to practice the proper protocols, such as reading a patient’s chart correctly, conducting safety checks, scanning a patient’s identification band and more. “The clinical instructors in the hospital are reporting that students have stronger skills than in the past, and seem more comfortable with medication administration,” Dr. Bryant said. “That’s because of simulation, because of deliberate practice. Students understand the rationale, and realize for each step why it’s important to follow protocol.”

Best practices and certifications for simulation educators

Although Dr. Bryant relied heavily on Dr. Jeffries’ early books for guidance due to the lack of available training opportunities, she cautioned novice educators against jumping into simulation. 

“All schools are realizing that if they don’t have a simulation program or a simulation-based curriculum, then they’re behind the curve,” she said. “Everyone knows they have to use simulation, but people aren’t really prepared to utilize it the best way. You have to be trained, you have to have that theoretical background and you need to know what you’re doing.”

For aspiring simulation educators, that begins with securing support from their school’s leadership as well as procuring funds to attend a training program or conference. “Education is the key—before you can start using it with students and teaching other faculty, you have to know what you’re doing and have that expertise first to utilize it and to teach others,” Dr. Bryant said. 

Without simulation training and instruction on what qualifies as high quality and high fidelity, schools will be out of compliance with the NCSBN and INACSL standards.

Educators who are committed to advancing their simulation knowledge and skills can become professionally certified. The Society for Simulation in Healthcare developed its Certified Healthcare Simulation Educator (CHSE) certificate in 2012 to recognize educators for their expertise in simulation. The certification demonstrates that an individual is committed to simulation and has specialized skills and knowledge.

Nursing schools with CHSE-certified educators ensure that their simulation is high quality and high fidelity, which is key to following the standards and best practices set forth by the NCSBN simulation study and the subsequent guidelines. 

“If you have a CHSE-certified person in your simulation center, you have high quality and high fidelity,” Ms. Farina said. “It really does support what the study was requiring. A lot of schools out there are doing simulations but are completely missing that high-quality, high-fidelity piece because they don’t know the pedagogy.” 

Interprofessional simulation

While nurse educators have advanced the field of simulation and set the standards for assessing clinical skills, other health care professions have also been using simulation technology for years. 

Chad Epps, executive director at the Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Simulation at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, recalls using a simulation-based model for practicing anesthesia during his medical residency program in 2001. “I learned how to use anesthesia on a simulator before I ever did it on a patient,” he said. “That left an impression on me in terms of its potential as an educational modality.”

Dr. Epps pursued his interest in education and simulation as he embarked on a career as an anesthesiologist. He became the director of simulation at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), where he started a program for nurse anesthetists and developed the curriculum, which included interprofessional simulation experiences. In his various simulation educator positions, Dr. Epps has pushed for more interprofessional experiences that mimic real-world clinical environments. 

“We graduate these professional health students, and they go into clinics and the clinical world, and they’re suddenly exposed to all of these other professions,” he explained. “In the past, [these students] never learned anything about those professions so they didn’t know what their role was, or what the other professions’ role was.” 

During his time at UAB, Dr. Epps and his colleagues developed simulation experiences for nursing and medical students that included specific competencies developed by the Interprofessional Educational Collaborative with intentional objectives related to the Team Strategies & Tools to Enhance Performance & Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) teamwork system for health care professionals designed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Studies have shown that hospitals that implement TeamSTEPPS have improved patient outcomes, and Dr. Epps wanted the medical and nursing students to become familiar with that model of communication. 

“At first, students thought [the interprofessional simulation] felt very strange,” he said. “But it got to the point where if we did a simulation with just medical students and the nursing students weren’t there, they’d look around and say, ‘Where are the nursing students, something’s wrong.’”

In addition to increasing interprofessional experiences among health care students, Dr. Epps said he expects to see simulation used more widely among health care providers to improve patient safety. “We shouldn’t just use simulation for students, we should use simulation for practicing professionals,” he said. “The airline industry has done this—if you’re a commercial pilot, you have to go through simulation every six months or you risk losing your license. We don’t have that in health care yet, although we probably need it.” 

Where does simulation go from here?

Simulation-based curricula and the use of simulation have been adopted by the majority of pre-licensure nursing programs. Our work continues in conducting the research to design best practices and to learn more about how simulation-based experiences affect student learning and, ultimately, patient outcomes and quality, safe care. 

AUTHOR meredith lidard kleeman


Why Should You Join a Professional Organization and Get Involved?

Ric Ricciardi on GW Foggy Bottom campus

AUTHOR Richard Ricciardi

Participation in professional organizations has substantially shaped my career and has provided me with opportunities to not only become a more productive, informed and engaged nurse, but also a more thoughtful and globally connected individual. I encourage everyone, both those who are new to the profession and those who are already established, to engage deeply in the transformative and healing power of our nursing profession through membership in a professional organization.

Active membership brings with it the joy and privilege of helping others beyond those in your immediate workplace and provides access to limitless possibilities for professional achievement and fulfillment, both locally and globally. The nursing profession offers a number of valuable organizations you might consider joining. Some are nursing focused, whereas others are interprofessional or specialty focused.  

Regardless of your professional experience or career phase, being an active member in one or more professional organizations has tangible benefits. Obvious benefits include access to local, regional and national conferences, journals and other resources to ensure continuous learning and support licensure or specialty certification. Participation in conferences and other programming, whether in person or virtually, provides the added benefit of an opportunity to interact with scientists and subject-matter experts to share ideas about how to implement new evidence to improve practice and care delivery. Some professional organizations also partner to offer reduced fees for malpractice insurance and continuing education credits. 

Exposure to fresh ideas and innovations in care delivery stimulates our creativity and provides an opportunity to tackle complex issues in practice, education, research and policy. Professional organizations offer a rich and unparalleled venue to engage with and learn from talented and successful leaders. The opportunity to network with a diverse group of colleagues, to strengthen your leadership, writing and public speaking skills, and to develop a broader understanding of organizational systems are key benefits. Participating in organizational initiatives such as guideline development, conference planning or policy statement preparation, or serving on a journal editorial board stretches your skills, confidence and scholarship. 

In my own career, the opportunity to work alongside a diverse group of colleagues on committees or work groups has nudged me to take on new roles and progressively greater responsibility while also providing mentorship and support. Taking on active roles in professional organizations has also allowed me to give back to the profession that has given much to me. We all stand on the shoulders of the giants that have come before us, and professional organizations provide a venue for us to pay that legacy forward, both individually and collectively. These organizations play a critical role in capacity building, career development and succession planning for the profession through scholarships, academic awards, leadership development workshops, formal mentoring programs and research funding. 

Contemporary health care is demanding, fast-paced, complex and dynamic. Day-to-day stressors can lead to a loss of purpose and joy in our work. Professional organizations provide programming and networking opportunities that allow us to share our joys and challenges and evolve our careers through meaningful opportunities.  

Nurses represent the largest segment of the health care workforce. As such, nursing organizations play an important role in representing and strengthening the capabilities and value that nurses bring to improving health for individuals, families and communities. Ensure your unique voice is included through active participation as we move our profession forward.

Helping Caregivers Give Care

Melissa Batchelor on steps of Capitol building

AUTHOR MELISSA BATCHELOR

On Dec. 31, 2018, the president signed into law Building Our Largest Dementia (BOLD) Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s Act, bringing much needed attention to the needs of over 5.7 million Americans living with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias.

I served on the Senate’s Special Committee for Aging in the office of the chair, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), during my Health and Aging Policy Fellowship in 2018. A large part of the work I did for the senator and Aging Committee focused on Alzheimer’s disease and working to get the BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s legislation passed in the 115th Congress.

More than 5 million Americans over the age of 65 are living with Alzheimer’s and that number is expected to triple by 2050. Of the top 10 leading causes of death for older adults, Alzheimer’s is the only one that cannot be prevented, slowed down or treated. 

The number of deaths from Alzheimer’s increased 145 percent between 2000 and 2019, while deaths from other diseases, such as heart disease and cancer, decreased in that time frame. The cost of unpaid family caregiving is estimated at over $232 billion and more than 18 billion hours. 

While we wait for a cure, those with the disease will need care. All types of dementia are essentially “brain failure,” and providing care requires a unique set of skills. Our communities and families do not have these skills in today’s society, and the BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s Act seeks to address this. 

Headed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s Act will establish Centers of Excellence to implement the CDC’s Healthy Brain Initiative through state and national partnerships. 

Most caregivers are friends and family members, and their lives are negatively impacted by the financial, emotional and physical cost of caring for someone with dementia. The Centers of Excellence will promote public education on early detection and diagnosis. By supporting early detection, the BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s Act allows persons living with the disease and their caregivers more time to plan and prepare their health care and end-of-life strategies.

As the BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer’s Act moves into the implementation phase, the work will be accomplished through cooperative agreements among public, private and nonprofit organizations. The CDC’s proposed action plan has one goal to monitor prevalence rates across the country. Data grants will improve the analysis of data collected on Alzheimer’s caregivers, and will illuminate health disparities at the state and national levels. 

We know that Alzheimer’s disease is on track to be the costliest condition in our nation’s history and is the most under-recognized threat to public health in modern times. The BOLD Act is among the first to draw attention to the enormous burden this disease brings. There are things we know to do that help, and we need to get that information out to the public to minimize the impact Alzheimer’s has on our families, communities and the nation.

Lecture Series Brings Health Care Leaders to Campus

U.S. Surgeon General Vice Admiral Jerome M. Adams speaks at GW's Foggy Bottom campus at the launch of the Health Policy Leadership Lecture Series.

AUTHOR GW NURSING

The Center for Health Policy and Media Engagement last fall launched the Health Policy Leadership Lecture Series, which brings to campus notable leaders in the health care field.

U.S. Surgeon General Vice Admiral Jerome M. Adams visited GW’s Foggy Bottom campus in October as the series’ first speaker. Dr. Adams discussed the nation’s opioid epidemic and identified stigma as the number 1 killer.

“As members of the most trusted profession, nurses can help alleviate that stigma and encourage patients to seek recovery,” Dr. Adams said. “There is nothing more powerful than a nurse armed with the correct information.”

Mental health, opioid abuse and obesity are just a few of the stigmatized health issues. The stigma keeps people in the shadows and prevents them from getting help, Dr. Adams said.

Victor Dzau, president of the National Academy of Medicine, also spoke this past winter as part of the series.

Currently, health and health care are the most prolific areas for technological advancement, Dr. Dzau said during a wide-ranging discussion on the burgeoning innovation in health care. Despite a political climate in which research budgets have been cut, health care is relatively safe because it is so clearly critical, he said. 

This spring, Terry Fulmer, president of and chief strategist for the John A. Hartford Foundation, visited the campus as part of the series to discuss age-friendly health systems. 

The Future of Graduate Simulation – Let’s Built It Together

Pam Slaven-Lee speaking at 2019 Sim Conference

AUTHOR PAMELA SLAVEN-LEE

Over my years of staffing, organizing and refining simulation-based learning events and how we use them in nurse practitioner education, I’ve seen learning happen. I’ve watched the proverbial “light bulb come on,” as students examine a standardized patient, or receive feedback from an instructor after an Objective Clinical Structured Exam exercise.

Our undergraduate colleagues, however, are ahead of us in establishing a body of literature to support simulation events and introducing best practices for instituting them. Too often, I still hear of simulation being used for summative assessments rather than formative learning. Experience shows that simulation used in high-stakes testing does not benefit our students and, in reality, can shake their confidence. True learning occurs and confidence is built through a formative use of simulation. 

Now is the time to establish these best practices.

During GW Nursing’s March simulation conference, I invited my graduate colleagues to join us in a simulation consortium, where we can acknowledge challenges before us, share resources and establish best practices. I now broaden that invitation to those readers interested in helping develop the use of simulation in advanced practice nursing education.

Join us and let’s build a future of graduate simulation together.

To get involved, visit go.gwu.edu/simconsortium today.

Pamela Slaven-Lee, DNP, FNP-C, CHSE
Sr. Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
School of Nursing
The George Washington University

At the Intersection of Education and Policy

Dean Jeffries on balcony in front of DC Mall

AUTHOR PAMELA R. Jeffries

If you want things to change, start a conversation. Maybe we take that for granted here in the nation’s capital, surrounded by national organizations and agencies of health. When I walk out onto Pennsylvania Avenue, I often find myself tripping on one of the many soapboxes throughout the city. Every once in a while, however, you fall into an important conversation at the intersection of education and policy. 

This happened over the winter to me when my colleagues and I began a vital conversation about the state of simulation in nursing education and its future. As educators, we know that incorporating simulation into the nursing curriculum instills confidence in students, allows immersion in their scope of practice, all in a safe, nonthreatening environment, and ultimately produces high-quality providers. 

While the literature points to clear benefits and outcomes of simulation at the undergraduate level, the body of evidence is lacking at the advanced practice nursing level. Given the scope of practice nurse practitioners have in each state, the use of simulation in instruction is as much a question of policy as it is education. In this issue of GW Nursing, we offer an invitation to our colleagues to engage in a national dialogue in order to discuss the clinical education challenges and to call for a strong body of research through multisite studies that will lead to the evidence and establishment of best practices for simulation in graduate nursing education. 

Like most great things, we can’t do it alone. Partnering with national nursing organizations is key to this discussion. We are fortunate to have several GW faculty on nursing boards, including Sigma Theta Tau International President-Elect Richard Ricciardi who writes on their importance to your career and the profession in this Spring 2019 issue of our GW Nursing Magazine. 

If you are looking for more conversations, I encourage you to learn more about our Health Policy Leadership Lecture Series to discover how you can get involved in health care policy. No matter what your daily journey entails, I encourage you to get out and occasionally trip on a soapbox. Sometimes the first step in creating change is to stumble into a conversation.