Advancing Nursing Research in Practice, Advocacy and Policy


July-December 2016 Issue

Nursing research will always be committed to the advancement of nursing practice, advocacy and policy that affect people’s quality of life. The researches nurses undertake continue to translate in the improvement of the quality of care as these reflect their commitment in the development of our nursing profession. I have seen how nursing researchers in our country have taken the trajectory of using multiple philosophical and theoretical underpinnings in their researches. This is a manifestation of the continuous search for various methods and/or methodologies, as a rigorous scientific inquiry in search for answers and/or finding effective strategies to achieve health goals for our people and profession. This issue of the Philippine Journal of Nursing illustrates the outputs of our nurses from various fields of practice.

Dones et al.’s Preliminary study on the Work Environment of Nurses in the Philippines describes work environment variables affecting Filipino nurses, and determines the degree of nurses’ job satisfaction, as well as their intention of remaining in their present work environment. This study showed “that the lowest positive responses were in the Physiologic and Safety Needs but despite this result, the nurses reported high job satisfaction and intend to remain in their present work environment.” Carsola and Palaganas’ article, Nursing, Nightingale and Beyond: Voices, Dialogues and Talks of the Future explored and grounded the voices of nurses in contemporary times, and unraveled nurses’ situations for the purpose of generating a substantive theory to guide and refine nursing practice. The study depicts a picture of struggles, successes, and potential solutions to the predicaments surrounding the nursing profession, thus having potential in improving nursing practice and policy based on the framework that emerged from the study.

Recent developments in nursing research reveal the increasing conduct of systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses of published data, and meta-analyses of individual data (pooled reanalyses). These are means of jointly summarizing and assessing different studies on a single topic due to the rising number of scientific publications. A Systematic Literature Review provides an overview of the state of research on a given topic, and enables an assessment of the quality of individual studies. It also allows the results of different studies to be evaluated together when these are inconsistent (Bettaby-Saltikov, 2012; Whittemore & Knafl, 2005). This is exemplified by Serafica and Gatlin’s work, as it summarizes the current recent literature in examining the effectiveness of web-based interventions to promote healthy lifestyles related to anthropometric measurements in adult individuals with various health conditions and status. Their article, Web-based Interventions Among Adults: Relevance to Anthropometric Indicators reported overall positive changes that “may prove useful information of effectiveness of web-based interventions relative to physiological outcomes such as anthropometric measurements. These programs can inform transformative practice and improvement of global health.” On the other hand, a meta-analysis is a statistic method to pool effect estimates from individual studies to one ‘meta’ result (Cooper, H. et al.,20088). Based on the premise that mental health professionals need to develop interventions that are evidence-based and cost-effective, Lacalle’s article, The Effect of Psychoeducation for Depression: A Meta-Analysis 2010-2016 examined randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the overall effectiveness of psychoeducation for depression. Results suggest that psychoeducation has low effect on depression indicating that longer and more interactive approach can be done to ensure its long-term and maximal effectiveness. The findings provide valuable information for future psychoeducation to improve content, design, quality, and process that will benefit patients with depression.

Researches geared towards the nurses themselves have always been a priority. We continue to assess our level of knowledge, competences and even attitudes as these redound to the quality of care we provide and to our commitment to leadership. Martinez’ Technological Competence as Caring and Clinical Decision – Making Skills among ICU Staff Nurses determined the level of technological competence as caring skill and its relation to the clinical decision making skills among ICU staff nurses. The study showed that the ICU staff nurses not only have “very high” level of technological competence as caring skill, but also have a “high” level of clinical decision–making skill. It was also evident that ICU staff nurses in Panay Island have been integrating technological caring with technological knowing as a collective expression of care in professional nursing. However, technological competence of caring in nursing does not guarantee high level clinical decision–making skills among the respondents. On the other hand, Rabaya et al.’s article, Nurses’ Familiarity on Disaster Preparedness in Hospitals determined the extent of familiarity on disaster preparedness of nurses in hospitals, and the significant difference when grouped according to years of experience, position and area of assignment. Findings revealed that nurses were moderately familiar on disaster preparedness and there was a significant difference in all variables revealing that nurses in hospitals have more to learn on disaster preparedness.

As part of our contribution in advancing nursing research, we continue to analyze theories and develop concepts and frameworks as we are confronted with the realities of our profession. The 3H Model of Holistic Care in Nursing by dela Peña, communicates and illuminates the value of caring to patient and nurses geared towards the improvement of nursing practices. He contextualized the “key defining attributes of caring into the 3H categories – the head, the heart, and the hands, which are very essential in the understanding and development of a categorical meaning of caring in the field of nursing.” Waldo’s article on The Silent Epidemic: Understanding the Concept of Workplace Bullying Among Nurses, explored bullying among nurses, from its attributes, characteristics, and evidences on its consequences. With the findings that show personal and professional costs from the victims and the organization when work place bullying is practiced, these can be rallying points for further research, advocacy and policy in nursing practice.

Reburon shares his perspectives on nursing resilience. Inspired by Roy’s view of the individual’s innate capacity for coping, he came up with a theory Warrior Resilience: Springboard towards Quality Nursing Care, which centered on the adaptation and resilience, not of patients, but of nurses. Reburon posits that “every failure carries a seed of an equivalent or greater benefit. Failures, challenges, and adversities must be accepted by every nurse with an open mind and a positive outlook. After all, these are the things which help us grow. The greater the fall, the greater the ascension.” Santos, on the other hand, shares her realization on her Random Thoughts On Resilience: “That it is not the word that gets to me. Rather, it is the fact that nurses are resilient by force. The question is, “What have nurses in the country done, out of their own initiative to help each other from not breaking?” This thought-provoking question leads us to ponder on our role in advancing nursing research in practice, advocacy and policy.

The culture of nursing research and the importance of a research-intensive environment and research productivity are here to stay. The challenge is to strengthen and sustain our embrace.


Bettaby-Saltikov, J. (2012). How to do a systematic literature review in nursing. Open University Press, Berkshire.
Cooper, H. M., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2008). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Whittemore R. & Knafl K. (2005). The integrative review: updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing 52(5), 546– 553