Current state of screening high-ACE youth and emerging adults in primary care.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Trauma comes in many forms, including interpersonal, community, and institutional trauma. The adverse childhood event (ACE) studies demonstrated that adverse experiences in childhood can have a profound, cumulative impact on the course of health and development over a lifetime. It is critical for healthcare providers, such as nurse practitioners (NPs), working in primary care to screen adolescents and emerging adults for a history of ACEs and trauma. A review of current assessment tools used in assessing this population in health settings is needed to determine how screening for ACEs is being performed. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically efficient tools for screening and assessment of high-ACE youth in primary care settings are lacking.  Developing a process to assess ACEs, risk behaviors, and physical and mental health status that is efficient to use during a time limited clinical visit is an important step in providing holistic care to a challenging population. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Primary care NPs are in the perfect position to implement assessments of ACEs through trauma-informed nursing care. ACE assessment in clinical practice will provide vital information to guide the development of tailored interventions for reducing risk behaviors and mitigate the long-term impacts of ACEs.

Scholarly productivity for nursing clinical track faculty.

Recent years have yielded substantial advancement by clinical track faculty in cohort expansion and collective contributions to the discipline of nursing. As a result, standards for progression and promotion for clinical faculty need to be more fully developed, articulated, and disseminated. Our school formed a task force to examine benchmarks for the progression and promotion of clinical faculty across schools of nursing, with the goal of guiding faculty, reviewers, and decision makers about what constitutes excellence in scholarly productivity. Results from analyses of curriculum vitae of clinical professors or associate professors at six universities with high research activity revealed a variety of productivity among clinical track members, which included notable diversity in the types of scholarly products. Findings from this project help quantify types of scholarship for clinical faculty at the time of promotion. This work provides a springboard for greater understanding of the contributions of clinical track faculty to nursing practice.