This chapter describes the Drexel University College of Nursing and Health Professions (CNHP) public health nursing faculty spearheaded the now 17-year-old partnership. The 11th Street Family Health Services center, with its large patient base, broad outreach, and innovative model is a primary component of the college’s mission. CNHP is committed to leading the way in improving health and reducing health disparities through innovative education, interdisciplinary research, and community-based practice initiatives. After the Future Search conference, the 11th Street Partnership for Community Based Care (PCBC) was established. CNHP-based program to improve the health status of residents in a public housing community has grown into a center that is now a nationally recognized transformative and integrated model of comprehensive care. The staff continues to refine programs and share best practices with others who are engaged in similar community efforts, and nurses will continue to lead the way in this university-community collaboration.
Your search for all content returned 1,259 results
- Go to chapter: 11th Street Family Health Services of Drexel University: A University–Community Partnership
This chapter focuses on a disaster that resulted in international cooperation at a time of political conflict. The vastness of the destruction and the number of persons who remained under the rubble shook the world’s public opinion; for the first time, a natural disaster emergency became an event of political significance in the field of international relations. Local responses to the earthquake augmented external assistance. Because the tsunami rendered the Messina harbor unusable, Italian Royal Navy torpedo boats could not immediately be used for helping the population. After the initial rescue work, the priority became disease control and vaccination of the entire population of southern Italy. Many nurses volunteered to help the survivors. Despite the difficulties of transferring people to the disaster area, volunteer teams consisting of nurses, doctors, engineers, technicians, workers, priests, and teachers provided their assistance to survivors in the earthquake zone.
This chapter examines the American Red Cross response to the 1913 floods in the Ohio-Mississippi river basin through the events that occurred in the cities of Dayton, Hamilton, and Cincinnati. It describes these Red Cross innovations in disaster response, the professional and gender-based barriers the nurses faced, and the approaches the nurse-responders used to achieve their goals. In order to understand the nursing response to the 1913 Ohio flood, it is helpful to place the nurses’ innovation within the organizational context of the American Red Cross in relation to changes in leadership, national status, and programs. The Red Cross nurses worked parallel to the military, their major interface being the use of martial law passes so that they could travel when and where they were needed, given the nighttime curfews. The overwhelming suddenness of disaster has led modern societies to plan a sufficient response before the disaster event occurs.
The 19130 Zip Code Project at the Community College of Philadelphia (CCP) started as a curriculum innovation: the CCP Department of Nursing’s response to the national shift toward community-based health care. The project resulted in the refocusing of the nursing curriculum and the development of partnerships with CCP’s neighbors in the 19130 zip code. It also is an excellent example of a nurse-managed wellness center without walls. The Zip Code Project has put down deep roots in the neighborhood and in the nursing curriculum. It has produced a community-based model for educating local health professionals and a service-learning model for enhancing health service delivery by local agencies. The faculty arranged community-based clinical experiences for nursing students in the neighborhood surrounding CCP. Although CCP sits in the middle of the zip code, faculty knew little about community-based health care services in the community.
The progressive care certified nurse (
PCCN®) examination is written and administered by the AACNand accredited by the NCCA. This exam is designed for RNsand APRNswho practice in progressive care units or provide direct care for acutely ill patients. The PCCNexamination is a 2.5-hr exam with 125 multiple choice questions. Of the 125 multiple choice questions, 100 are scored, and 25 are sample test questions to be used on future exams. Test covers two main topics: Clinical Judgment and Professional Caring/Ethical Practice. Clinical Judgment accounts for 80% of the questions and covers each body system, and its related diagnostic tests and nursing interventions. The examination cost for AACNmembers is $195, and the cost for nonmembers is $300. After successfully passing the PCCNexamination, certification is active for 3 years. Online renewal is available to active PCCNcertifications 4 months before the scheduled renewal date.
Many Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (
EMDR) clients process in a straightforward manner with few direct therapeutic interventions on the part of the clinician. For others, however, processing to completion without any additional interventions is unlikely. The reasons for blocked processing are varied and multifaceted. This chapter explores guidelines for facilitating abreactions, strategies for blocked processing, and applying more proactive interventions for achieving full treatment effect. These interventions are intended to mimic a natural progression toward resolution. Clinicians who are trained in EMDRtherapy are already familiar with many of the strategies particularly the strategies for clients who present with affect regulation difficulties or with complex trauma. Clinical supervision and/or consultation in these cases are always recommended. This chapter explores, three types of client responses—normal, overaccessing, and underaccessing—and strategies the clinician can apply when the client displays either low or high levels of emotions and/or blocked processing.
- Go to chapter: Access to Clean Water and the Impact on Global Health: An Interview With Gary White, CEO and Cofounder, Water.org
Access to Clean Water and the Impact on Global Health: An Interview With Gary White, CEO and Cofounder, Water.org
This chapter presents an interview between Gary White, chief executive officer and founder of Water.org related to water access and sanitation. It describes the issues around water and sanitation, and discusses successful strategies for increasing access to clean water. Water Partners International was very much about working directly with local partners on the ground to implement infrastructure through water projects and sanitation. The challenge is the cost of access to water. Everyone supports the idea of access to safe water and sanitation; everybody’s in favor of it. The dangers of contaminated water, especially in an immunocompromised individual, are overwhelming. The more that nurses, particularly in developing countries, view water as a medical intervention and sanitation as a medical intervention the more proactive nurses will be in addressing some of waterborne diseases. Access to clean water and sanitation is necessary to ensure freedom from preventable disease.
While 87.8% of adults in the United States report having a usual place of healthcare, that number drops to 79.8% among those living in poverty (National Center for Health Statistics [
NCHS], 2019). Of U.S. adults, only 65.3% report having a dental cleaning or examination in the last 12 months; in rural areas, 57.1% of the adult population report dental cleaning, compared with 66.6% of adults in large urban areas ( NCHS, 2019). In 2019, 8.3% of adults report not receiving needed medical care due to cost; among adults living with a disability, that number increases to 14.8% ( NCHS, 2019). Access to healthcare, including dental care, public health services, and mental and behavioral health services, is not equally distributed across the population. Differences in access to healthcare among populations are often related to social determinants of health and structural barriers such as employment, income, education and literacy levels, available services, location and transportation, race, ethnicity, gender, and age (Dickman et al., 2017).
Acute care hospitals and ambulatory health care facilities employ more social workers than other settings including individual and family services, schools, and state and local government agencies. The number of practicing health care professionals continues to rise and health care is now the largest employer in the United States. Acute care hospitals often include medical and surgical units, and patients need services that are required to be supervised by licensed medical personnel. Ambulatory settings provide diagnosis, treatment, and care that is not inpatient, and the treatment and care do not require the specialized services. This chapter identifies dialysis social work in nephrology settings as ambulatory care. It provides case exemplars to highlight acute and ambulatory care social work and the processes that are involved in assessment, intervention, and treatment. The chapter explicates areas of strength and concern in the present state of acute and ambulatory care social work practice delivery.