In light of recent changes at the New Jersey Board of Nursing, The NJCCN sent the following official statement to state government offices and professional nursing organizations:

The New Jersey Collaborating Center for Nursing’s (NJCCN) mission is to ensure that competent future oriented, diverse nursing providers are available in sufficient number and preparation to meet the demand of the evolving healthcare system in NJ. We serve as a central repository for education, practice and research related to nursing workforce. We work with the Board of Nursing (BON) to collect and analyze data both on educational capacity (annual) and workforce data at time of licensure. Timing of data collection and dissemination influence our ability to respond to current nursing workforce needs and to predict future needs. The lack of leadership, adequate staffing and time lag of communications has an adverse effect on our work. To this end we want to ensure that NJ creates and advances structures and processes at the Board of Nursing that will strengthen our workforce as we move forward.

Why is the BON structure and process so critical to New Jersey?

 The BON has its main purpose to protect the public from harm by ensuring minimum qualification and competencies for RNs, LPNs, APNs, Sexual Assault, Forensic Nurses, Home-Makers/Home Health Aides. Failure to do so impacts quality of care and safety of our consumers. As healthcare evolves, nurses and other providers are moving at a rapid pace from a structured environment into the community.

Therefore, the State needs an efficient means to adapt to the changing environment, providing the guidance and regulations necessary to ensure a properly trained, skilled and safety conscious workforce. The BON is responsible to ensure that the Nurse Practice Act (which guides nursing practice) and other regulations are in-line with the evolving roles of those they license or certify.

The Board oversees over 200,000 licensed nurses and certified homemakers and home health aides in NJ.  Delays in licensure or certifications not only impact the individual, but most importantly the workforce vacancies impact the care of consumers in NJ. Commitment to development of a staffing pattern that adjusts for fluctuations in activity is essential as we move forward to meet this need.   For example, at times of graduation or large licensure renewals there needs to be additional seasonal positions or overtime to accomplish this very important task.

The BON is designed so that professionals regulate the profession therefore, it is important to have nurses hired that oversee each of the functions of the Board of Nursing to better meet the needs of the nursing workforce.  Redefining the structure to ensure this is important.

What is the Board of Nursing responsible for?

 The Board of Nursing is responsible to:

Evaluate licensure applications

  • New graduates
  • Internationally educated nurses
  • Endorsements from nurses licensed in other states

Renewal of licenses/certifications

  • For RNs, LPNs, APNs, Sexual Assault, Forensic Nurses, Home-Makers/Home Health Aides
  • Monitors contact hours for those where it’s a requirement

Imposes disciplinary action to include:  reprimand, probation, restrict practice, suspend or revoke.  Issues include:

  • Incompetent practice
  • Unethical practice
  • Criminal convictions

Approval or closure of Nursing Education Programs (all levels) Promulgates Rules/Regulations

How is the Board of Nursing organized?

1 Executive Director which is vacant as of 8/11/17

15 volunteer members appointed by the Governor

Members Current Vacancies as of 8/1/2017
7 RNs (1 will be APN) 1
2 LPNs 2
3 Public members 2
1 Representative of the state 1
2 Nurse Educators 2 (Newly created positions)


The NJCCN Board and Advisory Council is represented by the following entities who are concerned about the future state of the Board of Nursing. They include:

  • Home Care and Hospice Association of NJ Consumers
  • New Jersey Hospital Association Practical Nurse Educators Council of NJ Staff Nurse
  • New Jersey State Nurses Association New Jersey League for Nursing
  • New Jersey Baccalaureate and Higher Degree Programs in Nursing
  • New Jersey Council of Associate Degree Nursing Programs
  • Association of Diploma Schools of Professional Nursing
  • Healthcare Association of New Jersey

We will make ourselves available to assist during this time of transition.

Contact:  Edna Cadmus PhD, RN, NEA-BC, FAAN, Executive Director, NJCCN email:  or 973-353-1428.

For more information, please view our publication on the Roles and Responsibilities of the NJBON here.

NJCCN Funds Residency that results in 86% Retention Rate

The NJCCN’s residency program in Long-Term Care was correlated with an 86% increase in retention of nurses entering the field. This residency program can be replicated through our recent publication of detailed lesson plans and external resources.

Health Leaders Media  reports that “Post-acute care has become an essential component of value-based care. By preparing new nurses through a long-term care residency program, facilities can improve nurse retention, confidence, and competency. Accountable care organizations, value-based care, and new reimbursement models are changing the healthcare landscape, and with that the role of the post-acute care nurse is evolving as well.” To view their full article, please click here.

 Progress in Achieving the Recommendations of the 2010 Institute of Medicine Report on

The Future of Nursing: Leading Change and Advancing Health

 Scope of Practice: An Updated Review of the Evidence
Prepared by
Joanne Spetz, PhD
Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies
University of California, San Francisco


 Acknowledgements:  Mary Naylor provided expert guidance via the Interdisciplinary Nursing Research Quality Initiative, INQRI. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation provided generous support for this literature review. 

Nurses should practice to the full extent of their education and training.” (Theme 1)

Evidence Brief:  Nurse Scope of Practice

Summary:  The IOM Future of Nursing Report recommended, on the basis of research evidence through 2009, that the U.S. should remove scope-of-practice barriers. Additional evidence has been published in 2016 and 2017 supporting the association between nurses having full practice authority and the supply of providers, access to care, quality of care, and costs. This research has focused primarily on nurse practitioners (NPs). Findings reinforce and strengthen prior research indicating that NPs provide primary care of similar quality as physicians, and that full practice authority for NPs is associated with greater access to care, fewer avoidable hospitalizations, fewer hospital readmissions, fewer emergency department visits specific conditions, and cost savings.


A new search on PubMed and a file of previously-collected articles were reviewed for articles published in 2016 or 2017 that examined the impact of advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) care on quality and costs. The literature was also reviewed to identify articles that examined the effect of scope of practice regulations on supply of nurse practitioners, their roles and satisfaction within health care organizations, access to care, quality of care, and costs. A total of 177 articles were retrieved, 43 of which were relevant to the aims of this review.

What is the strength of the new evidence published in 2016 and 2017 that full practice authority in nursing is associated with access to care, quality of care, and costs?

Over the past year, some new original research and several systematic reviews have been published on access, supply and quality of care provided by advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), with particular attention to the effects of NP, and the effects of these clinicians on costs of care. The evidence is stronger regarding the relationship between NP scope of practice and access to care than for costs, although the evidence regarding costs has strengthened over the past year.

What are the key findings of new research in 2016 and 2017 on the association between full practice authority and access to care, quality of care, and costs?

  • Access to care:
    • A literature review concluded that states granting NPs greater SOP authority exhibited an increase in the number and growth of NPs, greater care provision by NPs, and expanded health care utilization, especially among rural and vulnerable populations (Xue, Ye, Brewer, & Spetz, 2016).
    • An analysis of data from ambulatory medical practices found that NPs were more likely to work in primary care in states with full scope of practice, and also were more likely to provide primary care if the state also reimbursed NPs at 100% of the physician Medicaid fee-for-service rate (Barnes et al., 2016). A study of county-level data also concluded that removing scope of practice restrictions could modestly expand the capacity of the primary care workforce in the short-run (Graves et al., 2016).
    • A national study focused on nursing homes from 2000-2010 found an increase in the employment of NPs in nursing homes, but that scope of practice regulations had a “mixed” impact on NP employment growth (Intrator et al., 2015).
    • An analysis of NP scope of practice changes in three states found that relaxation of regulations was associated with retail clinic growth (Brooks Carthon, Sammarco, Pancir, Chittams, & Nicely, 2016).
  • Primary care outcomes:
    • An evaluation of a program that provided NP comanagement for a home-based primary care program reported that there was a high level of provider satisfaction and reductions in annual hospitalization and readmission rates among high-risk home-bound patients (Jones et al., 2016).
    • An evaluation of NP visits for African-American teens with asthma found a positive relationship between the number of NP visits and the students’ appropriate use of urgent care versus emergency room visits (Luckose, Harrison, & Velsor-Friedrich, 2016). Similarly, an early-stage evaluation of an NP-delivered intervention to reduce obesity in a primary care setting reported improvement in health responsibility, physical activity, nutrition, spiritual growth, stress management, and motivation for healthy living, and a decline in diastolic blood pressure declined (Ritten, Waldrop, & Kitson, 2016).
    • Some studies reported negative or neutral effects of NP care. A study of national rates of prescribing of opioid and benzodiazepine medications reported that there was no difference in statewide prescribing rates between states with restricted practice versus full practice authority for NPs (Schirle & McCabe, 2016). A study in Pennsylvania focused on prescribing of new chronic disease medications, reporting that NPs/PAs were slower to adopt new pharmaceuticals. This finding may suggest that NPs/PAs are more focused on evidence-based practice, receive less intense marketing from drug companies, or are more attentive to costs; the authors concluded that more research is needed to understand the differences (Marcum, Bellon, Li, Gellad, & Donohue, 2016). One study that used national survey data found that, compared to people with physician only care, patients with NPs/PAs as usual providers and supplemental providers had more primary care visits. Patients reporting NPs/PAs as supplemental providers had a greater risk of emergency department utilization and lower satisfaction; this relationship was not observed when NPs/PAs were usual providers. No differences were seen for hospitalizations or unmet need (Everett, Morgan, & Jackson, 2016). Another study reported that NPs had higher rates of antibiotic prescribing compared to physicians for pediatric patients for upper respiratory tract infections, although it is not clear if this is an indicator of good or bad care (Ference et al., 2016).
  • Outcomes for specific conditions and settings:
    • Two studies reported that NP-led interventions for patients with diabetes in pre-operative and inpatient cardiology services were associated with better glycemic control and quality of life (Garg et al., 2016; Li et al., 2017).
    • Multiple studies found positive effects of NPs on quality of care for cardiology services, including for a chest pain evaluation unit and for cardioversion (Ingram, McKee, Quirke, Kelly, & Moloney, 2016; Norton et al., 2016; Zhu, Islam, & Bergmann, 2016). An NP-led program for home-based patients with congestive heart failure reported a reduction in 30-day readmissions (Moore, 2016).
    • Two studies found that NP coverage in neurocritical care reduced door-to-needle time for stroke patients (Moran, Nakagawa, Asai, & Koenig, 2016). A study of an NP-led transitional stroke program documented that it reduced readmissions (Condon, Lycan, Duncan, & Bushnell, 2016).
    • A study of patient who had been admitted to the hospital for chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) reported that, compared to patients cared for by physicians, patients cared for by NPs/PAs more often received appropriate short-term treatment and referral to a pulmonologist. They also were less like to visit an emergency department for COPD compared to patients cared for by physicians (Agarwal, Zhang, Kuo, & Sharma, 2016).
    • A study of NPs in critical care units found they achieve similar outcomes as resident teams (Landsperger, Semler, Wang, Byrne, & Wheeler, 2016).
    • The addition of NPs and PAs to a liver transplantation program led to improved outcomes, including graft survival (Chaney, Harnois, Musto, & Nguyen, 2016).
    • The addition of an NP to an orthopedic trauma center was associated with a significant decrease in length of stay and costs (Hiza, Gottschalk, Umpierrez, Bush, & Reisman, 2015).
    • Two studies of NPs in pediatric inpatient settings reported fewer unplanned intensive care unit transfers and lower length of stay (Rejtar, Ranstrom, & Allcox, 2017; Rowan et al., 2016).
    • Three studies of NPs in long-term care settings found evidence of their benefit in these settings. One study compared the costs and effectiveness of establishing NP-MD teams for nursing home care. They reported reductions in emergency department transfers, but the data were not sufficient to demonstrate cost-effectiveness (Lacny et al., 2016). Another study evaluated the establishment of an NP-led pain management team in a nursing home, and reported significant improvements in resident pain and functional status (Kaasalainen et al., 2016). A third paper examined the impact of closing an NP-led program of all-inclusive care for the elderly (PACE), reporting increases in emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and nursing home placements post-PACE (Meunier et al., 2016).
    • One study has been published in nurse-midwife scope of practice, reporting that restrictive scope of practice laws were neither helpful nor harmful in regards to maternal behaviors and infant health outcomes, but states that allowed nurse-midwives to practice with no barriers had lower rates of induced labor and Cesarean section births (Markowitz, Adams, Lewitt, & Dunlop, 2016).
    • A study of scope of practice regulations for nurse-anesthetists found no evidence that the odds of a complication differ by scope of practice (Negrusa, Hogan, Warner, Schroeder, & Pang, 2016).
  • Costs and economic impact:
    • An analysis of Medicare data reported that evaluation and management payments for beneficiaries assigned to an NP were 29% less than payment for beneficiaries assigned to primary care physicians. There also were lower payments for inpatient and office visit payments (Perloff, DesRoches, & Buerhaus, 2016).
    • An analysis of insurance claims data found that restrictive NP scope of practice restrictions increased the price of a well-child visit by 3-16%, with no difference in quality outcomes (Kleiner, Marier, Park, & Wing, 2016).
    • Analysis of Medicaid insurance claims revealed that allowing PAs to prescribe controlled substances had a significant association with a reduction in the cost of claims of 11% per Medicaid recipient. Allowing NPs full prescribing authority was also associated with lower costs but the relationship was not statistically significant (Timmons, 2016).
    • Removal of scope of practice restrictions between 1999 and 2012 decreased the number of malpractice payments made by physicians by as much as 31% (McMichael, Buerhaus, & Safriet, 2017).
    • A study of the addition of NPs and physician assistants (PAs) to primary care teams were associated with significantly fewer specialist referrals. It also was associated with fewer hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and advanced diagnostic imaging services, but these effects were not statistically significant (Liu et al., 2017). An unrelated study used national data from ambulatory medical practices and found that NPs/PAs and physicians provided an equivalent amount of low-value health services for three common conditions, thus negating the hypothesis that NPs/PAs lower-value care (Mafi, Wee, Davis, & Landon, 2016).
    • A simulation model was used to estimate the economic impact of adding an NP or PA to a rural community. The analysis found that a rural NP/PA can generate 4.4 local jobs if the community does not have a hospital, and 18.5 jobs if it does (Eilrich, 2016).
  • Clinical roles, autonomy, and satisfaction:
    • Nurse practitioners who worked in primary care reported the highest levels of autonomy compared with other settings (Athey et al., 2016). NPs in rural settings – particularly remote areas – also reported greater autonomy and job satisfaction (Spetz, Skillman, & Andrilla, 2016).
    • Surveys of NPs and physicians revealed that physicians generally believed that NPs needed some association with physicians for patient safety, and NPs preferred having a physician readily accessible as needed (Kraus & DuBois, 2016).
    • An exploratory survey found that NPs perceived that requirements for physician oversight impacted their practice and may jeopardize patient safety (Lowery, Scott, & Swanson, 2016). An unrelated survey reported that NP autonomy and favorable relationships with leadership improve teamwork (Poghosyan & Liu, 2016).


Agarwal, A., Zhang, W., Kuo, Y., & Sharma, G. (2016). Process and Outcome Measures among COPD Patients with a Hospitalization Cared for by an Advance Practice Provider or Primary Care Physician. [Research Support, U.S. Gov’t, P.H.S.]. PLoS One, 11(2), e0148522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148522

Athey, E. K., Leslie, M. S., Briggs, L. A., Park, J., Falk, N. L., Pericak, A., . . . Greene, J. (2016). How important are autonomy and work setting to nurse practitioners’ job satisfaction? J Am Assoc Nurse Pract, 28(6), 320-326. doi: 10.1002/2327-6924.12292

Barnes, H., Maier, C. B., Altares Sarik, D., Germack, H. D., Aiken, L. H., & McHugh, M. D. (2016). Effects of Regulation and Payment Policies on Nurse Practitioners’ Clinical Practices. Med Care Res Rev. doi: 10.1177/1077558716649109

Brooks Carthon, J. M., Sammarco, T., Pancir, D., Chittams, J., & Nicely, K. W. (2016). Growth in Retail-Based Clinics Following Nurse Practitioner Scope of Practice Reform. Nursing Outlook, Online November 2016.

Chaney, A. J., Harnois, D. M., Musto, K. R., & Nguyen, J. H. (2016). Role Development of Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants in Liver Transplantation. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Prog Transplant, 26(1), 75-81. doi: 10.1177/1526924816632116

Condon, C., Lycan, S., Duncan, P., & Bushnell, C. (2016). Reducing Readmissions After Stroke With a Structured Nurse Practitioner/Registered Nurse Transitional Stroke Program. Stroke, 47(6), 1599-1604. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.012524

Eilrich, F. C. (2016). The economic effect of a physician assistant or nurse practitioner in rural America. Jaapa-Journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants, 29(10), 44-48. doi: 10.1097/01.Jaa.0000496956.02958.Dd

Everett, C. M., Morgan, P., & Jackson, G. L. (2016). Primary care physician assistant and advance practice nurses roles: Patient healthcare utilization, unmet need, and satisfaction. Healthc (Amst), 4(4), 327-333. doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2016.03.005

Ference, E. H., Min, J. Y., Chandra, R. K., Schroeder, J. W., Jr., Ciolino, J. D., Yang, A., . . . Shintani Smith, S. (2016). Antibiotic Prescribing by Physicians Versus Nurse Practitioners for Pediatric Upper Respiratory Infections. [Comparative Study]. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 125(12), 982-991. doi: 10.1177/0003489416668193

Garg, R., Metzger, C., Rein, R., Lortie, M., Underwood, P., Hurwitz, S., . . . Schuman, B. (2016). Nurse practitioner-mediated intervention for preoperative control of diabetes in elective surgery patients. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract, 28(10), 528-533. doi: 10.1002/2327-6924.12365

Graves, J. A., Mishra, P., Dittus, R. S., Parikh, R., Perloff, J., & Buerhaus, P. I. (2016). Role of Geography and Nurse Practitioner Scope-of-Practice in Efforts to Expand Primary Care System Capacity: Health Reform and the Primary Care Workforce. [Observational Study

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Med Care, 54(1), 81-89. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000454

Hiza, E. A., Gottschalk, M. B., Umpierrez, E., Bush, P., & Reisman, W. M. (2015). Effect of a Dedicated Orthopaedic Advanced Practice Provider in a Level I Trauma Center: Analysis of Length of Stay and Cost. [Comparative Study

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. J Orthop Trauma, 29(7), e225-230. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000261

Ingram, S. J., McKee, G., Quirke, M. B., Kelly, N., & Moloney, A. (2016). Discharge of Non-Acute Coronary Syndrome Chest Pain Patients From Emergency Care to an Advanced Nurse Practitioner-Led Chest Pain Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Study of Referral Source and Final Diagnosis. J Cardiovasc Nurs. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000374

Intrator, O., Miller, E. A., Gadbois, E., Acquah, J. K., Makineni, R., & Tyler, D. (2015). Trends in Nurse Practitioner and Physician Assistant Practice in Nursing Homes, 2000-2010. [Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural]. Health Serv Res, 50(6), 1772-1786. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12410

Jones, M. G., DeCherrie, L. V., Meah, Y. S., Hernandez, C. R., Lee, E. J., Skovran, D. M., . . . Ornstein, K. A. (2016). Using Nurse Practitioner Comanagement to Reduce Hospitalizations and Readmissions Within a Home-Based Primary Care Program. J Healthc Qual. doi: 10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000059

Kaasalainen, S., Wickson-Griffiths, A., Akhtar-Danesh, N., Brazil, K., Donald, F., Martin-Misener, R., . . . Dolovich, L. (2016). The effectiveness of a nurse practitioner-led pain management team in long-term care: A mixed methods study. Int J Nurs Stud, 62, 156-167. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.07.022

Kleiner, M. M., Marier, A., Park, K. W., & Wing, C. (2016). Relaxing Occupational Licensing Requirements: Analyzing Wages and Prices for a Medical Service. Journal of Law & Economics, 59(2), 261-291. doi: 10.1086/688093

Kraus, E., & DuBois, J. M. (2016). Knowing Your Limits: A Qualitative Study of Physician and Nurse Practitioner Perspectives on NP Independence in Primary Care. J Gen Intern Med. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3896-7

Lacny, S., Zarrabi, M., Martin-Misener, R., Donald, F., Sketris, I., Murphy, A. L., . . . Marshall, D. A. (2016). Cost-effectiveness of a nurse practitioner-family physician model of care in a nursing home: controlled before and after study. J Adv Nurs, 72(9), 2138-2152. doi: 10.1111/jan.12989

Landsperger, J. S., Semler, M. W., Wang, L., Byrne, D. W., & Wheeler, A. P. (2016). Outcomes of Nurse Practitioner-Delivered Critical Care: A Prospective Cohort Study. Chest, 149(5), 1146-1154. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2015.12.015

Li, S., Roschkov, S., Alkhodair, A., O’Neill, B. J., Chik, C. L., Tsuyuki, R. T., & Gyenes, G. T. (2017). The Effect of Nurse Practitioner-Led Intervention in Diabetes Care for Patients Admitted to Cardiology Services. Can J Diabetes, 41(1), 10-16. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjd.2016.06.008

Liu, H., Robbins, M., Mehrotra, A., Auerbach, D., Robinson, B. E., Cromwell, L. F., & Roblin, D. W. (2017). The Impact of Using Mid-level Providers in Face-to-Face Primary Care on Health Care Utilization. Med Care, 55(1), 12-18. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000590

Lowery, B., Scott, E., & Swanson, M. (2016). Nurse practitioner perceptions of the impact of physician oversight on quality and safety of nurse practitioner practice. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract, 28(8), 436-445. doi: 10.1002/2327-6924.12336

Luckose, A. B., Harrison, P. R., & Velsor-Friedrich, B. (2016). Effect of Nurse Practitioner Visits on Health Outcomes in African American Teens With Asthma. West J Nurs Res, 38(10), 1389. doi: 10.1177/0193945916658198

Mafi, J. N., Wee, C. C., Davis, R. B., & Landon, B. E. (2016). Comparing Use of Low-Value Health Care Services Among U.S. Advanced Practice Clinicians and Physicians. Ann Intern Med, 165(4), 237-244. doi: 10.7326/M15-2152

Marcum, Z. A., Bellon, J. E., Li, J., Gellad, W. F., & Donohue, J. M. (2016). New chronic disease medication prescribing by nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and primary care physicians: a cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res, 16, 312. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1569-1

Markowitz, S., Adams, E. K., Lewitt, M. J., & Dunlop, A. (2016). Competitive effects of scope of practice restrictions: Public health or public harm? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 22780. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

McMichael, B. J., Buerhaus, P., & Safriet, B. J. (2017). The Extraregulatory Effect of Nurse Practitioner Scope-of-Practice Laws on Physician Malpractice Rates. Medical Care Research and Review, Online January 2017.

Meunier, M. J., Brant, J. M., Audet, S., Dickerson, D., Gransbery, K., & Ciemins, E. L. (2016). Life after PACE (Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly): A retrospective/prospective, qualitative analysis of the impact of closing a nurse practitioner centered PACE site. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract, 28(11), 596-603. doi: 10.1002/2327-6924.12379

Moore, J. A. (2016). Evaluation of the efficacy of a nurse practitioner-led home-based congestive heart failure clinical pathway. Home Health Care Serv Q, 35(1), 39-51. doi: 10.1080/01621424.2016.1175992

Moran, J. L., Nakagawa, K., Asai, S. M., & Koenig, M. A. (2016). 24/7 Neurocritical Care Nurse Practitioner Coverage Reduced Door-to-Needle Time in Stroke Patients Treated with Tissue Plasminogen Activator. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t

Research Support, U.S. Gov’t, P.H.S.]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 25(5), 1148-1152. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.01.033

Negrusa, B., Hogan, P. F., Warner, J. T., Schroeder, C. H., & Pang, B. (2016). Scope of Practice Laws and Anesthesia Complications: No Measurable Impact of Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist Expanded Scope of Practice on Anesthesia-related Complications. Med Care, 54(10), 913-920. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000554

Norton, L., Tsiperfal, A., Cook, K., Bagdasarian, A., Varady, J., Shah, M., & Wang, P. (2016). Effectiveness and Safety of an Independently Run Nurse Practitioner Outpatient Cardioversion Program (2009 to 2014). Am J Cardiol, 118(12), 1842-1846. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.08.074

Perloff, J., DesRoches, C. M., & Buerhaus, P. (2016). Comparing the Cost of Care Provided to Medicare Beneficiaries Assigned to Primary Care Nurse Practitioners and Physicians. Health Serv Res, 51(4), 1407-1423. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12425

Poghosyan, L., & Liu, J. (2016). Nurse Practitioner Autonomy and Relationships with Leadership Affect Teamwork in Primary Care Practices: a Cross-Sectional Survey. J Gen Intern Med, 31(7), 771-777. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3652-z

Rejtar, M., Ranstrom, L., & Allcox, C. (2017). Development of the 24/7 Nurse Practitioner Model on the Inpatient Pediatric General Surgery Service at a Large Tertiary Care Children’s Hospital and Associated Outcomes. J Pediatr Health Care, 31(1), 131-140. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2016.08.007

Ritten, A., Waldrop, J., & Kitson, J. (2016). Fit living in progress–fighting lifelong obesity patterns (FLIP-FLOP): A nurse practitioner delivered intervention. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Appl Nurs Res, 30, 119-124. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2015.09.006

Rowan, C. M., Cristea, A. I., Hamilton, J. C., Taylor, N. M., Nitu, M. E., & Ackerman, V. L. (2016). Nurse practitioner coverage is associated with a decrease in length of stay in a pediatric chronic ventilator dependent unit. World J Clin Pediatr, 5(2), 191-197. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v5.i2.191

Schirle, L., & McCabe, B. E. (2016). State variation in opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions between independent and nonindependent advanced practice registered nurse prescribing states. [Comparative Study

Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural]. Nurs Outlook, 64(1), 86-93. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2015.10.003

Spetz, J., Skillman, S. M., & Andrilla, C. H. (2016). Nurse Practitioner Autonomy and Satisfaction in Rural Settings. Med Care Res Rev. doi: 10.1177/1077558716629584

Timmons, E. J. (2016). The effects of expanded nurse practitioner and physician assistant scope of practice on the cost of Medicaid patient care. Health Policy. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.12.002

Xue, Y., Ye, Z., Brewer, C., & Spetz, J. (2016). Impact of state nurse practitioner scope-of-practice regulation on health care delivery: Systematic review.  Nurs Outlook, 64(1), 71-85. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2015.08.005

Zhu, Z., Islam, S., & Bergmann, S. R. (2016). Effectiveness and outcomes of a nurse practitioner-run chest pain evaluation unit. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract, 28(11), 591-595. doi: 10.1002/2327-6924.12377

NJCCN Educational Summit 2017

Our 2017 Educational Summit was a great success! On April 7, more than 100 nurses gathered at the Forsgate Country Club in Monroe, NJ. The conference aimed to inspire grassroots nurses to use innovation as a strategy for defining new and current roles across the healthcare continuum.

Lynn Fick-Cooper’s keynote speech at our Educational Summit focused on self-care as an important component of resiliency. The high stakes of nursing professions pose risk of mental exhaustion and burn-out. It is so important to remember that we cannot effectively manage other people’s wellness unless we prioritize our own mental and physical health.

Laurie Haworth and Liz Klingensmith from Mercy Virtual presented advancements in the role of virtual nursing. They demonstrated that virtual nursing isn’t about replacing the bedside nurse – it’s about providing an extra layer of support and communication to increase monitoring of vitals, ease communication with patients, and improve the quality of care.

Mary Ann Christopher, a Horizon Executive, spoke on the role of nurses in transforming the system of care.

Tiffany Kelley provided a personal account of her journey as a nurse entrepreneur. Every nurse has the potential to become a problem-solver because they can capitalize on their uniquely personal insight into the challenges of healthcare.

Mental Health First Aid Training

30 School Nurses become Mental Health First Aid Certified March 11, 2017.


Program Overview: Youth Mental Health First Aid® for School Nurses Training is the help offered to a young person experiencing a mental health challenge, mental disorder, or a mental health crisis. The first aid is given until appropriate help is received or until the crisis resolves. Youth Mental Health First Aid® does not teach participants to diagnose or to provide treatment.

Program Objectives:

  1. Increase knowledge of mental health and substance use disorder issues in youth and adolescents.
  2. Enhance sensitivity to the prevalence of mental disorders in adolescent development resiliency, and the spectrum of interventions.
  3. Raise confidence to intervene and assist individuals experiencing a mental health issue by using a Mental Health First Aid Action Plan.

Location: Training is being offered by the New Jersey Hospital Association. The session will be held at 760 Alexander Road, Princeton, NJ. No late arrivals will be permitted.

Accreditation Statement
HRET is accredited by the Medical Society of New Jersey to provide continuing medical education for physicians. HRET designates this live activity for a maximum of 8.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Health Research and Educational Trust is an approved provider of continuing nursing education by the New Jersey State Nurses Association, an accredited approver by the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation. Provider Number P131-1/15-18. This activity provides 8.0 contact hours.
There are no conflicts of interest, sponsorship or financial/commercial support being supplied for this activity. Accredited status does not imply endorsement by the provider or American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation of any commercial products displayed in conjunction with an activity.
HRET has been approved by the New Jersey Department of Health as a provider of New Jersey Public Health Continuing Education Contact Hours (CEs). Participants who successfully complete this educational program will be awarded 8.0 New Jersey Public Health Continuing Education Contact Hours (CEs).