The slippery slope: Differentiating between quality improvement and research

Journal of Nursing Administration

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 211-219

  Newhouse, Robin P ^a,b,d   Pettit, Joan C ^d   Poe, Stephanie ^a   Rocco, Laura ^c  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NURSE; NURSING CARE; NURSING PRACTICE; PATIENT CARE; REVIEW;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; NURSING RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RISK; TERMINOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33646058273     PISSN: 00020443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005110-200604000-00011     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. American Nurses Credentialing Center. Magnet Recognition Program. Silver Spring, Md: American Nurses Credentialing Center; 2005.
2. Reinhardt AC, Ray LN. Differentiating quality improvement from research. Appl Nurs Res. 2003;16(1):2-8.
3. Newhouse RP, Mills ME. Enhancing a professional environment in the Organized Delivery System: lessons in building trust for the nurse administrator. Nurs Admin Q. 2002;26(3):67-75.
4. Kondrat BK. Operating room nurse managers - competence and beyond. AORN J. 2001;73(6):1116-1130.
5. Newhouse RP, Mills ME. Research in the community hospital. J Nurs Admin. 2001;31(12):583-587.
6. Department of Health and Human Services. Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Public Welfare Part 46: Protection of Human Subjects, current through April, 2005. Department of Health and Human Services.
7. Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Participants. Responsible Research: A Systems Approach to Protecting Research Participants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2002.
8. Casarett D, Karlawish JH, Sugarman J. Determining when quality improvement initiatives should be considered research: proposed criteria and potential implications. JAMA. 2000;283(17):2275-2280.
9. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report. DHEW Publication No. (OS) 78-0013 and No. (OS) 78-0014. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; 1979.
10. American Nurses Association. Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice. Washington, DC: American Nurses Association; 2004.
11. Council of Nurse Researchers, Council of Nursing Practice. Education for participation in nursing research. American Nurses Association. 1994. Available at: http://www.nursingworld.org/readroom/position/research/rseducat.htm. Accessed September 27, 2005.
12. Levine R. Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1988.
13. Doezema D, Hauswald M. Quality improvement or research: a distinction without a difference? IRB Ethics Hum Res. 2002;24(4):9-12.
14. Solberg LI, Mosser G, McDonald S. The three faces of performance measurement; improvement, accountability, and research. J Qual Improv. 1997;23(3):135-147.
15. Ovretveit J, Bate P, Cleary P, et al. Quality collaboratives: lessons from research. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11(4):345-351.
16. Joint Commission for Healthcare Organizations. Comprehensive Accreditation Manual for Hospitals: The Official Handbook. Oakbrook Terrace, Ill: Joint Commission for Healthcare Organizations; 2004.
17. National Bioethics Commission. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants. Bethesda, Md: National Bioethics Advisory Commission; 2001.