Abstract Introduction: In 2017, the role of coordinating practitioner was introduced in the Netherlands in order to improve quality of care for patients who receive treatment in specialized mental health care. Psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs) can fulfil this role. Aim/Question: The aim was to obtain insight into how PMHNPs fulfil the coordinating practitioner role and what is needed to improve fulfilment of this role. Method: A survey among PMHNPs in the Netherlands was conducted between July-September 2018. In total, 381 PMHNP filled out the questionnaire; the response rate was 47.6%. Descriptive analyses were performed using SPSS 22® (IBM). Results: 92% Of the PMHNPs fulfilled the coordinating practitioner role and were generally satisfied with their role performance. The following conditions were formulated to improve this role: 1) recognition and trust in the expertise of PMHNPs, 2) a clear description of their role as coordinating practitioner, 3) strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, and 4) sufficient training budget and opportunities. Discussion: In Dutch mental health care, PMHNPs have strengthened their position as coordinating practitioner in a short period of time. Follow-up research should be conducted to obtain further insights into elements that contribute to an optimal role as coordinating practitioner. Implications for Practice: Having PMHNPs act as coordinating practitioners can contribute to solving the challenges in mental health care regarding coordination of care and effective multidisciplinary collaboration.
Rationale, aims and objectives: The aims of this study are as follows: (a) to establish whether a relationship exists between the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethics in care and their likelihood to report reprehensible conduct committed by colleagues, and (b) to assess whether this relationship is moderated by behavioural control targeted at preventing harm. Method: In this cross-sectional study, which was based on a convenience sample (n = 155) of nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) in the Netherlands, we measured ethics advocacy (EA) as a motivating factor (reflecting the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethics and care) and “behavioral control targeted at preventing harm” (BCPH) as a facilitating factor. “Reporting reprehensible conduct” (RRC) was measured as a context-specific indicator of whistleblowing intentions, consisting of two vignettes describing morally questionable behaviour committed by colleagues. Results: The propensity to report reprehensible conduct was a function of the interaction between EA and BCPH. The only group for which EA predicted RRC consisted of individuals with above-average levels of perceived BCPH. Conclusion: The results suggest that the importance that healthcare professionals attach to ethical aspects in care is not sufficient to ensure that they will report reprehensible conduct. Such importance does not induce reporting behaviour unless the professionals also perceive themselves as having a high level of BCPH. We suggest that these insights could be helpful in training healthcare providers to cope with ethical dilemmas that they are likely to encounter in their work.
ABSTRACT Background: Psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs) in the Netherlands have been allowed to perform the role of coordinating practitioner (CP) since 2018. This role is reserved for mental health care specialists who are trained and qualified at the master’s degree level. Earlier studies have not addressed how PMHNPs perform that role and what mechanisms and contextual factors determine their performance. This understanding could help optimize their performance in this role and promote effective deployment of PMHNPs in mental health care. Purpose: To understand how PMHNPs perform this role and what mechanisms and contextual factors underlie that performance. Methodology: A multiple case study involving PMHNPs who work in various settings as CPs. Data were collected and analyzed using the realistic evaluation approach. Results: We identified four mechanisms related to the performance of PMHNPs in the role of CP: (1) autonomous performance; (2) unique expertise; (3) accessibility, availability, and professional involvement; and (4) additional roles. The extent to which these mechanisms are present is largely determined by organizational factors, team factors, and individual factors. Conclusions: Psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners are seeking to identify and interpret the role of CP. This study helps to elucidate the mechanism of role performance by PMHNPs and what they should focus on to deliver effective and patient-centered mental health care. Implications: Policymakers, health care professionals, and educators should consider the mechanisms and contextual factors to facilitate and support PMHNPs’ employment and training in the role of CP.
