HealthOctober 12, 2017

At the core of Magnet: Innovations and outcomes

A look at New Knowledge, Innovations and Improvements and why this is an essential component of the ANCC Magnet Recognition (R) model.

The ANCC National Magnet 2017 Conference is finally here! To help get into ‘Magnet mode,’ our “Calling the Shots: Nursing News and Notes” blog is taking a closer look at the ‘forces of Magnetism’ with a 4-part series on the components of the current ANCC Magnet Recognition® model.  Today’s blog is the fourth and final installment that focuses on New Knowledge, Innovation and Improvement.

The new knowledge, innovation, and improvements component and the empirical outcomes component of the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Magnet Recognition Program model promote action and advancement.

“In 2008, it became clear to the Magnet Commission that the next generation of the Magnet model had to focus on outcomes,” Craig Luzinski, MSN, RN, NEA-BC, FACHE, who at the time was Magnet Recognition Program director at the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), wrote in the Journal of Nursing Administration. “Although structure and process were necessary elements of nursing excellence, the link to evidence-based practice and outcomes was increasingly becoming essential to nursing practice.”

Here’s a look at the final two components of the Magnet model.

New knowledge, innovation, and improvements

The new knowledge, innovation, and improvements Magnet component is the profession’s call to move health care delivery and the nursing profession forward.

“Magnet organizations have an ethical and professional responsibility to contribute to patient care, the organization, and the profession in terms of new knowledge, innovations, and improvements,” ANCC states on its website. “Our current systems and practices need to be redesigned and redefined if we are to be successful in the future.”

This component relies on the use of evidence-based practice, research, and innovation.

To encourage a culture of evidence-based practice, nursing leaders must provide staff the freedom to question the foundation of current practices and the resources — such as medical librarians and advanced practice consultants — to seek answers, Luzinski advised.

Research, meanwhile, should incorporate advance practice nurses and educators, who are typically well-versed in research methods. At the same time, staff nurse participation is important, too, according to Luzinski. Although they may lack formal training in research, staff nurses can learn about and develop an appreciation for research through journal clubs, on-site research conferences, continuing education, and even involvement in studies. Results and knowledge gleaned through research should then be shared with others via posters, presentations, and articles.

Finally, innovation that aims to improve outcomes, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness should also involve nurses at all levels as well as the understanding that not all new and creative ideas will succeed.

“Being innovative and willing to change is not always comfortable,” Luzinski acknowledged, “but it is invigorating and makes the work so rewarding.”

Empirical outcomes

The empirical outcomes component of the Magnet model isn’t concerned with what hospitals do or how they do it. Rather, it seeks concrete data on the difference a hospital has made.

According to the ANCC website, outcomes are not specified, are minimally weighted, and should involve data the organization already collects. Outcomes need to be organized using the following categories: nursing outcomes, workforce outcomes, patient and consumer outcomes, and organizational outcomes.

Luzinski further explained, “Hospitals must demonstrate data that are above the 51st percentile for the majority of the 8 quarters of the reporting period, when benchmarked against comparable national databases, for clinical outcomes (especially nurse-sensitive indicators), patient experience, and nurse satisfaction. Evidence of an organization's ability to establish baselines for measures and track progress over time compared with the baseline and national benchmarks is essential to achieving and maintaining Magnet recognition.”

He challenged organizations to follow the lead of Magnet designees and set goals well above a 51% benchmark.

“Do not settle for simply having indicators that exceed the benchmarks for the majority of quarters during a 2-year monitoring period,” Luzinski encouraged. “Many Magnet organizations set their sights on exceeding benchmarks for 75%, 90%, or 100% of the reporting period.”

When all is said and done, exceeding, not settling, underlies every component of the Magnet model

Explore related topics
Lippincott Solutions
Our best-in-class suite of evidence-based, institutional software can help you to balance clinical and business needs by streamlining workflow, standardizing care, and improving reimbursable patient outcomes.