Clinical Leadership Development Workshops for Licensed Practical Nurses in Supported Living in Alberta: An Exploratory Qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This study had three aims: 1) to develop and deliver a clinical leadership development (CLD) workshop for licensed practical nurses (LPNs) who work in supported living (SL) contexts; 2) to explore LPN participants’ experiences, as well as the influence of the workshop on their attitudes, knowledge, and skills; and 3) to explore the feasibility of implementing a work-based CLD workshop for LPNs working in SL in Alberta. Background: Effective clinical leaders create an efficient and caring work environment, resulting in quality care for patients that attend to both their physical (e.g., safety) and psychological (e.g., autonomy) needs. In SL in Alberta, nursing care is primarily undertaken by LPNs, who work with both registered nurses (RN) and health care aides (HCA) in delivering quality care to older adults. As a result, LPNs are required to undertake clinical leadership (CL) roles that they are often under-prepared for. CL requires the development of a new set of skills for LPNs. To date, few resources have been devoted to developing educational programs to teach these skills, particularly in relation to work-based learning. This program addressed the issue of improving LPNs’ CL skills by developing and delivering a work-based CLD workshop. Design: An exploratory qualitative design was used, incorporating multiple data collection methods, including individual and focus group interviews, a demographic questionnaire, and a knowledge questionnaire. Interview data were analyzed using thematic description and the knowledge questionnaire data were statistically analyzed using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Result: The themes were captured in the findings: exploring and raising awareness of the LPNs role as a clinical leader; a sense of empowerment for LPNs in their role as clinical leader; the influence of the CLD workshop on teamwork and communication; and feasibility’s facilitators and challenges. The data affirmed the need for developing a program to help LPNs improve their CL skills, and understand and undertake their CL roles and responsibilities. The effectiveness of the CLD workshop was demonstrated through the LPN participants’ increased confidence, autonomy, and perceived control over decision-making. Following the workshop, the participants expressed a sense of empowerment, which resulted in changed attitudes about their capacity and their role. Conclusion: This study has shown the importance of LPNs understanding their role as a clinical leader, developing effective communication skills, and establishing a working relationship with and among their staff; it has also shown the significance of empowering LPNs. Limitations of the study included challenges arranging and scheduling the necessary time for LPNs to attend CLD workshop, availability and sustainability of the CL training for new staff, and refresher training for the existing staff.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".