Break this down for me Barney-style, since I'm not even a nursing student yet (I apply after this semester). I have seen a few posters here say that magnet hospitals are a crap place to work. When I googled "magnet hospital", all I could find were blurbs like this, that don't sound bad at all:
"The Magnet Recognition Program is a recognition program operated by the American Nurses Credentialing Center that recognizes healthcare organizations that provide excellence in nursing. It is considered the highest recognition for nursing excellence.[1] The program also offers an avenue to disseminate successful nursing practices and strategies. ANCC proclaims that "A growing body of research indicates that Magnet hospitals have higher percentages of satisfied RNs, lower RN turnover and vacancy, improved clinical outcomes and improved patient satisfaction."[2]"
These are obviously contradictory, but I'm sure that people are saying they're not the best place to work have some reasoning, since I've seen it more than a couple times.
Actually, there are a lot of people saying ADN nurses are not as capable as BSN. They even have a "study" that "proves" it. Many threads here on this topic.
What changed? Who are these people? Studies can be skewed!!!! So If you are a good nurse with an ADN your BSN is merely icing on the cake, but it doesn't transform nurses into better nurses well rounded maybe but not better. This divisive tactic is why this profession is where it is now. No unity!!! Could you give me the name of the study so I can read it. I would be interested in looking it over.
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
What changed? Who are these people? Studies can be skewed!!!! So If you are a good nurse with an ADN your BSN is merely icing on the cake, but it doesn't transform nurses into better nurses well rounded maybe but not better. This divisive tactic is why this profession is where it is now. No unity!!! Could you give me the name of the study so I can read it. I would be interested in looking it over.
The study most people are referring to was published by Aiken (Linda?). I don't have the full citation, but I'm sure you can find it if you google.
Here is an actual literature review that looked at 24 different studies. This analysis found little/no relationship between RN education level and patient outcomes.
Ridley, R. (2008). The relationship between nurse education level and patient safety: an integrative review. Journal Of Nursing Education, 47(4), 149-156. doi:10.3928/01484834-20080401-06
The study most people are referring to was published by Aiken (Linda?). I don't have the full citation, but I'm sure you can find it if you google.
Here is an actual literature review that looked at 24 different studies. This analysis found little/no relationship between RN education level and patient outcomes.
Ridley, R. (2008). The relationship between nurse education level and patient safety: an integrative review. Journal Of Nursing Education, 47(4), 149-156. doi:10.3928/01484834-20080401-06
I read the Aiken's study, and I wonder what unknown variable was considered in the Ridley, R. stuff that showed no relationship at all (between nursing ed level and patient outcomes)? I haven't read it yet, and I wonder if I'll find it.
This is from here, looks like some kind of online assignment and the below quote is taken from one of the comments.
B.The argument for and against increasing entry-to-practice educational levels to Baccalaureate (BSN) is an interesting two-sided debate. Some of the arguments are based on outcomes. Holding a BSN or higher has shown to decrease mortality in patients(Aiken, Clarke, Cheung, Sloane, Silber, 2003). Nursing education levels when analyzed next to Patient Safety Indicators (PSI) by Renee Ridley in her literature review showed more data linking better outcomes with higher education (Ridley, 2006).
The article by Ridley can't be accessed for free, so don't know what it says, but it sounds like the opposite point to yours is being made here!
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
This is from here, looks like some kind of online assignment and the below quote is taken from one of the comments.
The article by Ridley can't be accessed for free, so don't know what it says, but it sounds like the opposite point to yours is being made here!
Sure does, doesn't it? I just skimmed the article itself (I'm home sick with the flu and possibly pneumonia, so my brain is a little hazy) but the abstract stated in no uncertain terms that the literature review found no evidence in difference in patient outcomes based on education level of the RN. Let me C&P it.
Abstr
A
ct
The relationship between patient safety and nurse education level has implications for current and prospective
nurses, hospital administrators, policy makers, and nurse educators. This integrative literature review assesses the
current state of science on the topic during a 20-year period, using the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality's
Patient Safety Indicators to measure outcomes. Twenty-
four studies of variable quality were included. Although
Sure does, doesn't it? I just skimmed the article itself (I'm home sick with the flu and possibly pneumonia, so my brain is a little hazy) but the abstract stated in no uncertain terms that the literature review found no evidence in difference in patient outcomes based on education level of the RN. Let me C&P it.
Thanks for posting that :) No wonder people are confused. We can't just blame some internal lack of intelligence to 'them', there are genuine external confusions. There's probably a reasonable explanation for this one, but look at the effect it has. Bad ideas are one thing, but if our source of information is carelessly tossed together or deliberately misused to bolster an agenda on EITHER side, we're all clueless.
There's a free class on Coursera right now called "Metaliteracy: Empowering Yourself in a Connected World". It's been going on three weeks now but it allowed me to sign up and watch the last few week's videos. So far it gets at addressing these kinds of issues, how to look for and access information in all of it's many forms in this age of HUGE amounts of information at your fingertips on the internet. Knowing what information is true or accurately presented is a big challenge. I've seen people on this forum use a personal blog as 'evidence' for what they believe about X. Maybe this is one thing the BSN DOES do, which is teach a person how to do basic research, and what a relevant source is versus a less relevant source.
I can get the article free from my school website. I am looking forward to reading this. I will read with an open mind because everyone is entitled to their opinion. :-)
When our new hires three years ago were told they must have a BSN by the end of 2015, I was told it was because we were trying to get magnet status and the goal was 80% BSN nurses. Nurses even have a hard time transferring to other units within the hospital without a BSN, because each dept wants 80% BSN nurses. I never verified that this was a requirement but many hospitals are treating it like it is.
There is a suggestion from some nursing groups that a "BSN in 10" should be a goal. With it, administration took the ball and ran, in my experience stating it as a mandate as opposed to a suggestion of a goal.
By creating an illusion that nurses can start governing themselves--which again, in my experience is a puppet theater to put personal time in to complete part of the DON's job, administration still has the final say on whether the ideas put forth by the actual bedside nurses (and I do not know of a whole lot of MSN prepared DON's who have been at bedside in the last decade or at all). It is getting nurses to complete an agenda which has already been written by administration.
Magnet is an expensive tool. Which, BTW, has a patient (or many patients) EVER said "yes, I am critically ill, however, I want to be transferred to a Magnet facility?" There may be some, but they may find that in fact, the care would be equal regardless.
If one is a union facility, administration has little patience for unions. It gives up control of nurses and their practice. Specifically, by letting nurse's have the illusion they are governing themselves, it can change standards (like pay, and raises). Because at the end of the day, that is management's goal--to get the most credentialed nurse at the lowest price who will stay and work on committees that the DON can present as the "latest and greatest".
Back in the day patients came to a hospital, set up shop, and stayed for weeks and months. Some with their own private duty nurses in tow. For a little rest, their family goes on vacation--whatever--the tolerance for admission was a great deal lower than it is now.
Now it is instant gratification. Get em in, make them believe they have a private duty nurse, educate--and who the heck cares if they actually understand the education, just make sure you get signatures and record on the computer education was received, and get them the heck out. Assembly line nursing. And seasoned, certified in a specialty nurses--who are educated to provide care that means something understand that this is not good practice, but have little choice.
Then comes a PR ploy such as a national certification of nursing excellence. Which is such irony, as nursing excellence means 100 different things to 100 different nurses. All leading to the management team who rains accolades on everyone and everything except for the nurses.
Clinical ladders of success means absolutely nothing if you can't actually practice it on your 8 patient load. Policies that are for the good of the unit, and naturally the patient are not worth the paper they are printed on unless a management team gives complete control of the unit to the nurses that are part of the nursing team that dictates such. And that is highly unlikely.
Maybe the goal of Magnet is to let the nurses take control, and not have a need for DON's and managers.....In all seriousness, all of this committee work on one's own time is like a hamster on a wheel. Which pretty much sums up the whole magnet process.
And let's think of it one more way. Let's say magnet is a master's degree. One really, really wants a masters, however, can't seem to do all of the work it takes to obtain it. So, you get other experienced nurses to do the work for you. That you pass off as your own. And you get the masters. Heck, with some talented nurses, get your capstone paper published!! Then you are indebted to said nurses--so you start passing out bones to give these nurses illusions that they were instrumental in a process that resulted in one person's goal. Then you decide to take a degree inflation suggestion as law, and before you can all of the nurses who don't have a degree level to assist you in getting a doctorate, (or a monetary bonus, or recognition that one craves) you make sure that what you do is to be sure that any bit of facility knowledge, clinical competency, whatever it is that a lesser degreed nurse can put out there--you let them. Because you can't run a unit with highly degreed nurses who don't know a foley from a fruit bowl. Then, without so much as a backward glance, you get rid of anyone who costs the facility money, and is lesser degreed as to not disrupt a goal that is only important to a management group.
I have said this ad nauseum--however, should all nurses choose to work for minimum wage, and take on work on their own time to boot, wouldn't matter what degree one holds.
This has nothing to do with anything, but my hospital cut differentials and installed a fancy new lobby with a f***king FIREPLACE in the space of a few months. That is not the way to build morale.
I think MAGNET status is like the difference between having a Vera Wang dress opposed to a Walmart special on the 9.99 rack!! A label on the hospital that only benefits the infrastructure not the nurses. I think it paves the way to hell with good intentions!!!!
I am a new grad struggling with the "BSN requirement" vs. ASN and am new to learning about this magnet process. However after hearing administration (nursing directors) preach to me during interviews and now doing my research... the magnet status seems like "fluff". It is supposed to "empower nurses". Well how about you hire me and then ill be empowered in order to progress as a nurse and start paying my bills. which I also found out... bedside nurses do not need BSN to be magnet only nursing management does. The question isnt whether or not I will continue my education... Im considering MSN bridge for cryin out loud!
Not to mention whether you go to ADN or BSN nursing school you in fact take the same NCLEX for the same license! So if NCSBN allows ADN to be RN and thats who the state boards of nursing licenses through, than why are ADN nurses all of a sudden deficient? I have a BA in another degree and a new grad RN- ADN, so forgive me for thinking I could start working once I was to become a licensed RN and find a decent bridge program or BSN that works after I become oriented with job. There is a lot of documentation, time management, and clinical skills to be learned.... so train me please, a bachelors is not going to do this. How completely discouraging for new grads... and frankly unfair. If i had experience it wouldnt factor in me being hired yet because I have no experience as an RN now my education isnt good enough??
danielle2000, MSN, RN
174 Posts
What changed? Who are these people? Studies can be skewed!!!! So If you are a good nurse with an ADN your BSN is merely icing on the cake, but it doesn't transform nurses into better nurses well rounded maybe but not better. This divisive tactic is why this profession is where it is now. No unity!!! Could you give me the name of the study so I can read it. I would be interested in looking it over.