PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2458400

Leaping the chasm between nursing theory and practice.

Abstract

The author considers that whilst nurse tutors teach theory, nurse practitioners go on nursing in the same way that they always have done. There appears to be a chasm dividing theory and practice. This paper describes an attempt to leap that chasm. The paper identifies the problem, inherent in the nursing process that creates such difficulties in its implementation. The nursing process alone does not provide an adequate framework for nursing practice. The paper then describes how the translation of theory into practice took place on a ward in Brighton General Hospital, Brighton, England. The barrier between theory and practice is highlighted, along with a description of how the problems this presents to ward staff were overcome. The author considers that the attribution of cause is a key concept in the problem-solving approach, since it generates the question--Why?--and therefore that attribution of cause must be a concept in any model of nursing that is being used to implement the nursing process. The paper provides an example of how nursing models may be adapted, at ward level, to guide everyday practice, whilst retaining the conceptual framework of the model. The inference of the paper is that such a process could be applied to other models resulting in a greater use of theory in everyday nursing practice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T Lewis. 1988. Leaping the chasm between nursing theory and practice.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1988.tb01428.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗