Course and Portfolio Overview
This MSN Core E-Portfolio provides a structured and comprehensive record of the Clinical Practice Experience (CPE) requirements completed for the course D031: Advancing Evidence-Based Innovation in Nursing Practice. The portfolio is intentionally designed to illustrate a progressive academic and professional journey that integrates evidence-based practice, healthcare innovation, and reflective nursing scholarship. Across multiple phases, the portfolio documents written assignments, scholarly reflections, and supporting artifacts that collectively demonstrate alignment with course objectives and CPE Record expectations. Overall, the portfolio reflects continuous professional growth and the intentional application of nursing knowledge to improve patient outcomes and healthcare system performance.
Phase 1: Required CPE Activities and Timeline
The first phase focuses on establishing organization, accountability, and time management through a clearly defined schedule of required CPE activities. This structured timeline supports consistent progress and ensures that all foundational course components are completed efficiently. The table below outlines the required activities, a brief description of each task, anticipated completion dates, and the estimated time commitment.
Table 1
Clinical Practice Experience Activities and Timeline
| CPE Activity | Description | Anticipated Completion Date | Estimated Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1a | CPE Schedule Table | 08/01/2024 | 30 minutes |
| 1b | Role and Responsibilities of a Nurse Innovator | 08/02/2024 | 1.5 hours |
| 1c | GoReact Screenshots (3) | 08/15/2024 | 1 hour |
| 1d | Phase 1 Reflection Summary | 08/15/2024 | 30 minutes |
Role and Responsibilities of a Nurse Innovator
What is the role of a nurse innovator in healthcare?
A nurse innovator serves as a catalyst for change within healthcare environments by integrating clinical expertise with analytical reasoning and creative problem-solving. These professionals identify gaps in care delivery, inefficiencies in workflows, and emerging patient or system needs. By leveraging evidence-based practice, technology, and interdisciplinary collaboration, nurse innovators design and implement solutions that improve patient safety, quality of care, and operational effectiveness. Their role extends beyond traditional bedside responsibilities and often intersects with leadership, informatics, quality improvement, and organizational strategy.
What traits characterize nurse innovators?
Nurse innovators commonly demonstrate adaptability, intellectual curiosity, and a willingness to challenge established practices. They tend to exhibit lower risk aversion and actively participate in innovation-driven behaviors such as piloting new technologies, redesigning care processes, and testing alternative staffing or care delivery models. According to Leary et al. (2024), these nurses consistently engage in activities that support innovation, including evaluating research evidence, leading change initiatives, supporting digital health integration, and measuring outcomes to ensure sustainability. These traits enable nurse innovators to respond effectively to the evolving demands of modern healthcare.
How important is collaboration in the nurse innovator role?
Collaboration is a critical component of the nurse innovator role. Nurse innovators routinely partner with healthcare administrators, information technology professionals, engineers, educators, and frontline clinicians to ensure that proposed innovations are practical, scalable, and aligned with organizational goals. Additionally, they advocate for policies and educational initiatives that embed innovation competencies within nursing curricula. This collaborative approach prepares future nurses to function as change agents and supports long-term professional development across the discipline (Cusson et al., 2020). Through fostering a culture of inquiry and continuous improvement, nurse innovators contribute to safer, more efficient, and more equitable healthcare systems.
Phase 1 Reflection Summary
What were the key learnings from Phase 1?
Phase 1 emphasized the essential role nurses play as innovators within healthcare systems. It reinforced the idea that frontline nurses are uniquely positioned to recognize inefficiencies, patient safety risks, and opportunities for improvement due to their direct involvement in care delivery. Learning about the defining characteristics of nurse innovators clarified that innovation is not limited to formal leadership roles but is embedded within everyday nursing practice. Reflection on personal clinical experiences revealed numerous instances where innovative thinking had already been applied, often without conscious recognition. This phase highlighted the importance of intentionally developing innovation competencies through education, reflection, and practice to support continuous improvement in healthcare delivery.
Phase 2: Evidence Appraisal and Scholarly Resources
What role did the Overview Cohort and Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool play in this phase?
The Overview Cohort provided essential orientation to course expectations and clarified the sequence and purpose of Clinical Practice Experience activities. It introduced key academic resources, including the Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool, and explained how and when these tools should be applied during scholarly work. This guidance supported effective navigation of course requirements and strengthened confidence in completing evidence-based assignments.
How does the Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool support evidence appraisal?
The Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool offers a systematic and structured approach to evaluating the quality, relevance, and applicability of research literature. By guiding users through a stepwise appraisal process, the tool promotes consistency and rigor when assessing scholarly sources. Its use reinforced the understanding that evidence from various levels of research can meaningfully inform clinical decision-making when appropriately contextualized and critically evaluated.
Why is selecting high-quality evidence essential for supporting disruptive innovation?
High-quality, peer-reviewed evidence is essential when proposing or implementing disruptive innovations in healthcare. Evidence-based support ensures that innovations are grounded in scientifically validated findings, which enhances credibility and facilitates stakeholder buy-in. Disruptive innovations often challenge existing workflows and professional norms; therefore, robust evidence is necessary to identify risks, address ethical considerations, and demonstrate patient safety and effectiveness. Scholarly literature also plays a critical role in securing organizational approval, funding, and long-term sustainability for innovative initiatives.
Phase 2 Reflection Summary
What insights were gained during Phase 2?
Phase 2 reinforced the principle that successful healthcare innovation must be grounded in credible and rigorously evaluated research. Developing proficiency in evidence leveling improved the ability to differentiate high-impact, applicable studies from less relevant sources. These skills are essential for both academic scholarship and clinical practice, particularly when proposing innovative solutions to complex healthcare problems. This phase strengthened confidence in using evidence as a foundation for informed decision-making and innovation leadership.
Phase 3: Practice Problem and Disruptive Innovation
What are the underlying issues contributing to the identified healthcare practice problem?
Healthcare systems are increasingly challenged by rising patient acuity, persistent workforce shortages, and rapid technological advancements. Bedside nurses are required to manage complex patient conditions while simultaneously completing extensive documentation and adapting to evolving clinical technologies. High patient-to-nurse ratios contribute to fatigue, burnout, and an increased risk of adverse events. Variability in clinical experience among nursing staff further complicates care delivery, particularly for novice nurses or those transitioning to new specialties who may lack immediate mentorship. Additionally, the demand for continuous learning amid heavy workloads creates significant strain, underscoring the need for innovative support models that enhance nursing practice without increasing staffing burdens.
How can disruptive innovation improve healthcare outcomes?
The implementation of a virtual resource nurse represents a promising disruptive innovation. This model utilizes telehealth technology to provide bedside nurses with real-time access to experienced nursing support for clinical decision-making, documentation assistance, patient education, and care coordination. By reallocating certain cognitive and administrative responsibilities to a virtual nurse, bedside clinicians can focus more effectively on direct patient care. Virtual resource nurses also deliver just-in-time education and mentorship, supporting skill development and confidence among less experienced nurses. This innovation has the potential to improve patient safety, streamline workflows, reduce burnout, and optimize existing nursing resources.
What was the process for conducting the evidence search?
The evidence search was conducted using the WGU Library, with primary emphasis on the SAGE database. Search terms included “virtual nurse,” “virtual resource nurse,” “virtual bedside nurse,” and “hospital setting.” Filters were applied to limit results to publications from 2019 to 2024 to ensure currency and relevance. The Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool was used to appraise the quality and applicability of the identified studies. Selected articles were reviewed in depth to confirm alignment with the identified practice problem and the proposed disruptive innovation.
Phase 3 Reflection Summary
What reflections emerged from Phase 3?
Phase 3 encouraged critical examination of common nursing practice challenges and exploration of innovative strategies to address them. Focusing on workload demands and staffing shortages highlighted the practical value of virtual nursing models as a supportive solution. Conducting a systematic literature search and applying rigorous evidence appraisal strengthened appreciation for evidence-based innovation. This phase enhanced confidence in translating scholarly research into actionable clinical solutions and proposing innovations that are both feasible and impactful.
References
Cusson, R. M., Meehan, C., Bourgault, A., & Kelley, T. (2020). Educating the next generation of nurses to be innovators and change agents. Journal of Professional Nursing, 36(2), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2019.07.004
Leary, M., Demiris, G., Brooks Carthon, J. M., Cacchione, P. Z., Aryal, S., & Bauermeister, J. A. (2024). Determining the innovativeness of nurses who engage in activities that encourage innovative behaviors. Nursing Reports, 14(2), 849–870. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14020066
Perpetua, Z., Seitz, S., Schunk, J., Rogers, D., Gala, J., Sherwood, P., Mikulis, A., Santucci, N., Ankney, D., Bryan-Morris, L., & DePasquale, K. (2023). Virtual discharge: Enhancing and optimizing care efficiency for the bedside nurse. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 38(3), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000689
Sagastume, R., & Peterson, J. (2023). The virtual nurse program in a community hospital setting. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 28(2). https://doi.org/10.3912/ojin.vol28no02man02
Schwartz, R., Hamlin, S., Vozzella, G., & Randle, L. (2024). Utilizing telenursing to supplement acute care nursing in an era of workforce shortages: A feasibility pilot. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 42, 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000001097
Swink, K., Berris, M., King, S., Frame, S., Munoz, R., & Magallon, A. L. (2023). Innovation in nurse staffing models: Implementing a tele–critical care nurse program in a pediatric cardiac intensive care unit. AACN Advanced Critical Care, 34(4), 334–342. https://doi.org/10.4037/aacnacc2023719
Tibbe, M., Arneson, S., & Welsh, C. (2023). Rise of the virtual nurse. AACN Advanced Critical Care, 34(4), 314–323. https://doi.org/10.4037/aacnacc2023391