Reply to two other groups seperately. In each your reply posts:
After watching the Grand Theory Group Presentations of other groups, please respond to the following within the discussion forum of the other group:
- Compare and contrast the other nursing theorist to your own. (The grand theorist My group chose was Sr. Callista Roy and the Roy Adaptation Model (RAM). (Define metaparadigm concepts including patient, health, environment, and nursing.) Ensure you clearly identify to which group’s presentation you are discussing.
Use a minimum of two new scholarly references in APA style to support your replies. The replies should integrate a minimum of two readings and/or other evidence-based research articles (not including the required reading) no more than 3 years old and use APA formatting for citations and references.*
Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded.
Group 4 –
My group focused on Betty Neuman and the Neuman Systems Model (NSM) for our grand theory presentation. Initially, I was interested in researching the NSM because the theory can be applied to multidisciplinary treatment teams and promotes a holistic patient care approach (Neuman & Fawcett, 2011). Multidisciplinary teamwork and holistic patient care are integral concepts in psychiatric mental health nursing. Treatment for mental illness cannot focus on just one system (JosÃ© Carlos Santos et al., 2018). Many factors can impact mental health. For example, an individual may experience depression due to a chemical imbalance, or the trigger may be situational. It is essential to consider all the elements of an individual to provide targeted treatment. The multidisciplinary treatment team is a pillar of integrated care, an evidence-based strategy shown to improve mental health outcomes (McGregor et al., 2019). As a psychiatric nurse, I was hoping to learn about a theory I could apply to my practice. While I find value in the NSM, I do not foresee myself using this theory in my practice.
The NSM is a complex theory in presentation and scope (Alligood, 2018). The conceptual framework of the theory made sense to me, but I found the number of concepts, interrelation of concepts, and overlap in variables to be very confusing. Additionally, a large portion of the literature I reviewed on the NSM pointed me to the primary source, Neumanâ€™s published text, for clarification of concepts, diagrams, case studies, etc. Unfortunately, I could not access Neumanâ€™s text through the Regis College library or my work library. I took a few steps to resolve these challenges. First, I watched a few video lectures on the theory. It was helpful to learn about the components of this theory separately before viewing it entirely. Then, I thoroughly reviewed the theory diagram. The diagram is intricate, but I found it somewhat helpful as it depicts the relationships between concepts. With some lingering confusion, I opted to subscribe to an online e-book service to access Neumanâ€™s text. I found the primary source to be the most helpful in providing clarity. References: Alligood, M. (2018). Nursing theorists and their work (9th ed.). Elsevier. JosÃ© Carlos Santos, Cutcliffe, J. R., & Springerlink, (2018). European Psychiatric/Mental Health Nursing in the 21st Century: A Person-Centred Evidence-Based Approach. Springer International Publishing. McGregor, B., Belton, A., Henry, T. L., Wrenn, G., & Holden, K. B. (2019). Improving Behavioral Health Equity through Cultural Competence Training of Health Care Providers. Ethnicity & Disease, 29(Supp2), 359â€“364. https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.29.s2.359 Neuman, B. M., & Fawcett, J. (2011). The Neuman systems model (5th ed.). Pearson.
Hendersonâ€™s theory promotes a holistic approach in caring for the patient and considers physiological, communication/learning, spiritual/moral, and sociological components to overall health. We found Hendersonâ€™s theory to be presented in a very clear manner with easy-to-understand language. The 14 activities for client assistance or patient needs are very straightforward and simple to apply into everyday practice. Hendersonâ€™s theory differs from the primary critiques of other grand theories being difficult to understand, abstract, and challenging to apply into practice (McEwen & Wills, 2019). Many of us reflected that we unknowingly practice Hendersonâ€™s theory of helping patients return to their original state of independence in our day-to-day work as nurses. Though we may unknowingly practice aspects of her theory, learning her theory and referring to her 14 activities is a helpful tool in establishing a patient plan of care. Henderson provides a clear, practical framework for all nurses to implement into clinical practice. As demonstrated in our slide presentation, Hendersonâ€™s concepts have also been useful in nursing education as well as research.
Hendersonâ€™s concept is essentially her definition of nursing (McEwen & Wills, 2019). Because of Hendersonâ€™s clear definition and guidelines, it is easy to integrate her theory internationally. Hendersonâ€™s theory identifies the basic needs of humans independent of culture, environment, or state of health or illness. Though Hendersonâ€™s theory provides a foundation for patient care, discussion regarding the nurseâ€™s attitude and expression of caring is another important component to nursing that is not focused on in Hendersonâ€™s approach. This is an area where the work of other theorists, such as Jean Watson, a middle range theorist who championed the â€œtheory of human caringâ€ can be integrated when applied into practice. Henderson does not explicitly define â€œhealthâ€ or â€œenvironmentâ€ creating a challenge in leaving it somewhat open to interpretation (Gligor & Domnariu, 2022). Despite these limitations, Hendersonâ€™s needs theory is applicable to the care of an individual in any healthcare environment, making it an essential concept to understand and practice. Ribeiro et al. (2018) found in a study of 3,451 Portuguese nurses that Hendersonâ€™s needs theory was the most influential when compared with other nursing grand-theorists. Henderson has provided the nursing profession with a framework versatile for any patient regardless of their diagnosis and is utilized by nurses worldwide (Ribeiro et al., 2018).
Due to the lack of explicit definition of meta-paradigm concepts, it is imperative that when applied to clinical practice, education, or research that in the specific context a definition must be explicitly stated. An explicit statement or acknowledgment of the definition in a specific case would prevent confusion, vague comprehension, or even a misunderstanding from occurring. To resolve these challenges, it is important to recognize the overall parsimony of this theory is very simple, yet with very complex possibilities.
Gligor, L. & Domnariu, Carmen Daniela. (2022). Patient care approach using nursing theories:
Comparative analysis of Oremâ€™s self-care deficit theory and Hendersonâ€™s model. Acta
Medica Transilvanica. 2, 11-14. doi: 10.2478/amtsb-2020-0019
McEwen, M. & Wills, E. M. (2019). Theoretical basis for nursing (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
Ribeiro, O. M. P. L., Martins, M. M. F. P. D. S., Tronchin, D. M. R., & Forte, E. C. N.
(2018). The perspective of Portuguese nurses on nursing metaparadigmatic concepts. Texto Contexto Enferm, 27(2), p. 1-9. doi: 10.1590/0104-070720180003970016