Running head: MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

Mentoring Nurse Practitioner Colleagues: Implementing an Online Program
Heather A Healy
Arizona State University

1

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

2
Abstract

The mentor role can help support the experienced nurse practitioner (NP) enhance a sense
of belonging and commitment to the organization; however, NPs identify barriers of time,
dedication, and lack of knowledge about mentoring. Current mentoring programs in Arizona are
sporadic and formal training for the mentor is even more limited. In this project, an online
training intervention to develop mentorship skills was provided for experienced NPs who viewed
three video sessions of 20-25 minutes each. The topics (Open Communication & Accessibility;
Mutual Respect & Trust; Independence & Collaboration) focused on developing key mentoring
competencies identified from the literature. Participants did not report a significant increase in
their mentoring skills after the video sessions, but they identified useful individual outcomes.
Participants identified the need to formalize the experience with objectives for both the mentee
and mentor and recommended seeking out the novice NP to build a mentoring relationship.
The project outcomes led to several recommendations. To support ongoing mentor
relationships, organizations may need to push training out to their experienced NPs on the role of
the mentor. Mentors who do not self-identify for remediation or training may need organizations
to provide the training and not make it optional. Community and professional organizations like
the Arizona Board of Nursing, Arizona Nurses Association and others could create training
modules utilizing multiple platforms to reach NPs in rural and urban parts of the state. Finally,
further projects are necessary to identify the most effective modalities when delivering training.
Keywords: Nurse Practitioner, Mentor, Mentor Training, Mentee, Self-Efficacy

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

3

Mentoring Nurse Practitioner Colleagues: Implementing an Online Program
Mentoring has been effective in reducing turnover, increasing organizational
commitment, increasing employee investment in organizational success, improving job
satisfaction, and decreasing role ambiguity. Evidence supports the improvement in professional
efficacy and promotion of career growth for both mentor and mentee (Faraz, 2019; Meier, 2013;
Brook et al., 2019). Recent evidence has stressed the importance of a strong mentor relationship
between the novice and experienced Nurse Practitioner (NP) (Zhang et al., 2015; Faraz, 2017;
Jnah & Robinson, 2015; Horner, 2017). The expressed commitment of organizations to
implement mentor programs for novice nurse practitioners and nurse practitioners moving into
specialty areas is increasing across the country. Still, there is growing evidence that the
experienced NP is not actively engaging in supporting colleagues (Dean, 2017). Experienced
NPs who are making a difference at the bedside, in the community, and the classroom report they
are struggling to find the time, confidence, and support needed to mentor future nurse
practitioners. NPs express concern over their ability to mentor (Jarrell, 2016; Jnah, & Robinson,
2015; Jones, 2017; Faraz, 2017).
This paper will review the current literature for reasons why the experienced NP is not
engaging in mentoring activities, examples of interventions to enhance engagement, and finally,
provide a description of an evidence-based initiative to implement a mentoring program utilizing
asynchronous online modules.
Purpose and Rationale
As nurse practitioners are critical to the future of sustainable healthcare, many
organizations are examining ways to protect their investments in their employees. Recruiting,
hiring, onboarding, and training new nurse practitioners can take up to 12 months without a

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

4

return on investment if the newly hired NPs leave the organization. Organizations must look at
ways to retain staff, including providing support through mentorship. The mentor is the sounding
board, guide, and confidant who can help novice nurse practitioners achieve their highest
potential. However, many experienced NPs report feeling uncomfortable in the mentor role and
express needs for their support and guidance as mentors (Jnah and Robinson, 2015; Faraz, 2017).
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the outcomes of an evidence-based education
program implemented to enhance the mentoring skills of experienced nurse practitioners.
Significance of the Problem
The importance of highly qualified NPs in the workforce is growing. The United States
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (2016) projects a shortage of 23,640 full-time
physicians by 2025. HHS proposes that effective incorporation of NP services in care delivery
could improve access to primary care services and mitigate disparities in underserved rural areas.
According to the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (2017), NP numbers have grown
from approximately 106,000 in 2004 to 234,000 as of 2017, with a speculated 36 percent
increase in the need for NPs by 2025 (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2016).
This significant growth in the NP workforce will require planning to attract, retain, and mentor
newly hired nurse practitioners in health organizations.
In 2006, Fellows of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (FAANP) sponsored
a think tank to explore the mentoring needs of students, recent graduates, and seasoned nurse
practitioners (those with 5 or more years of clinical experience). The participants identified three
groups that could serve as mentors for the newly graduated nurse practitioner: faculty, NP
graduates with one-two years of experience, and seasoned NPs. They further acknowledged that
experienced graduates can mentor in either the formal workplace or informal settings. The think

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

5

tank participants recommended that the seasoned practitioners receive recommendations for
formal training programs and tool kits to develop their mentoring competencies (FAANP, 2006).
Action recommendations from the think tank included: mentoring toolboxes, formal mentoring
programs through local, state, and national NP organizations, guidelines for mentoring, and
enhancing programs within schools of nursing and other educational institutions (FAANP, 2006).
In 2019, the American Nurses Credentialing Centered implemented a requirement for mentoring
to the ANCC Magnet© application. Organizations must show evidence of positive quality
outcomes related to evidence-based mentor programs for all levels of nursing practice, including
the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (ANCC, 2017).
Internal Evidence
In Arizona, the average age of nurse practitioners is 54, with many anticipated
retirements over the next ten years. Arizona has a 3% increase annually in newly licensed NPs
(Arizona Board of Nursing, 2019), creating a growing need to mentor these new nurse
practitioners. Just as new nurse practitioners need support to learn their clinician roles,
experienced NPs need assistance to take on the essential part of guiding and teaching novice NPs
(Faraz, 2019). Evidence supports the development of mentoring programs to decrease staff
turnover, increase the intent to stay and promote positive satisfaction is robust in higher
education, business, and in nursing with emerging evidence applicable to the nurse practitioner
(Taylor et al., 2017; Brook et al., 2019).
The need to train experienced nurse practitioners with mentoring skills led to the
following PICOT question:

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

6

In experienced nurse practitioners (NPs) (P), how does mentorship education (I),
compared to no mentorship education (C), affect their role development and satisfaction as a
mentor (O), over a two-hour training program (T)?
Literature Review
Search Strategy
The search strategy included evidence-based, peer-reviewed scholarly work, including
doctoral theses and dissertations within the last ten years, January 2009 – December 2019. The
initial search focused on the mentor/mentee relationship and the value of a structured mentoring
program for career advancement, job satisfaction, and intent to stay. Additional searches
examined confidence in the mentoring process for the mentor and measurements for evaluating
mentoring behaviors and attitudes.
PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsychINFO databases were searched.
Several articles looked at mentoring in residencies, fellowships, and orientation programs. Nurse
practitioners were referenced in a variety of ways; therefore, additional search terms used included

nurse practitioner, advanced practice provider, advanced practice registered nurse, and midlevel. Increasing the search to encompass academic medicine, registered nurses, nursing faculty,
and healthcare leaders increased search results.
Limited results were found focusing on the nurse practitioner, so other industries and
professionals were identified that may have similar needs for mentorship. ProQuest
ABI/INFORM, Advanced Technologies, and Aerospace were searched for evidence in business,
management, law enforcement, military, and aerospace. Searching for mentor, mentee, and
mentoring, along with satisfaction and turnover, yielded over 4,000 responses in the broader
disciplinary databases. After including confidence, mentoring framework, role development,

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

7

training, and retention, the restricted search led to 104 scholarly articles. Further limits were
applied to remove fellowships, residencies, children, teenagers, and undergraduate college
students.
Evidence from the ProQuest ERIC database was most robust regarding mentorship in
academia; multiple records were identified. After placing limits as defined above, 23 articles
were designated for further review. The relationship between novice faculty and tenured faculty
appeared similar to the relationship of the novice nurse practitioner to experienced nurse
practitioners, thus allowing for a reasonable connection to the experience found with nurse
practitioners.
Reference lists and citation manager suggestions were also used to identify possible
articles for inclusion. Grey literature was reviewed to determine current trends. Two large
National Institute of Health-funded programs offered web-based tools, training, white papers,
and literature reviews about mentorship programs. Ten studies were retained for the critical
appraisal: one systematic meta-analysis, two systematic reviews, one mixed-method, one crosssectional survey, and five quasi-experimental with a post mentor survey (see Appendix A).
Critical Appraisal
Mentoring is about encouraging career growth and job satisfaction and reducing turnover
for both the mentee and the mentor (Meier, 2013). Lafleur and White (2010) proposed that
novice case managers could benefit from mentorship for guidance through Benner's stages of
clinical proficiency and development. They found that case management mentors reported a
positive impact on personal satisfaction, professional competency, and organizational
contributions.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

8

The last five years have seen a dramatic increase in evidence of the power and
importance of mentoring. The literature supports participation in a formal mentoring program for
nurses, nurse practitioners, healthcare leaders, military officers, managers, researchers, and
faculty (Gandhi & Johnson, 2016; Jarrell, 2016; Jones, 2017; Gosh & Rio, 2013; Minnick et al.,
2014). Further literature states that a robust mentoring relationship supported improved job
satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and professional development for both the mentor
and mentee (Faraz, 2017; Gandhi & Johnson, 2016; Jarrell, 2016; Jones, 2017).
Synthesis
Many of the ten studies appraised used a quasi-experimental approach; most used a postintervention survey of mentors or mentees (see Appendix B). The survey responses and the
addition of open-ended questions in a few mixed method studies yielded robust information on
the impact of job satisfaction, intent to stay, organizational commitment, competency, and selfefficacy of both the mentor and mentee.
Central themes emerged out of the evidence despite variability across industries, tools to
measure competency, and research methods. Those themes included that a mentor has a positive
impact on the mentee, the mentee shows evidence of improved competence and self-efficacy, and
both have improved job satisfaction and career success (Brook et al. 2019; Zang et al. 2016;
Gosh & Rio, 2013). As organizations work towards recruitment, retention, and job satisfaction, a
mentorship program can be vital to organizational success (Gosh & Rio, 2013).
The review and critical appraisal of the literature identified the length of time a mentee
needs a mentor, length of time needed to train the mentor, ideal characteristics of the mentor, and
how to support a good mentor/mentee pair. The evidence also looked at what stage in the hiring
process to implement a mentor program, how long mentor programs should be and what type of

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

9

training is necessary. Lau, et.al (2016) identified that a 4-hour mentoring session was able to
yield similar results to a two-day workshop. The authors utilized the Mentoring Competency
Assessment (MCA) as a pre/post survey prior to and following the workshop, and noted
participants improved their comfort level with participating in difficult conversations and
expanded their understanding of the challenges when working with a mentee.
The Mentoring Competency Assessment (MCA) scale was developed to support
mentoring effectiveness among senior university researchers and novice university researchers.
Lau et al. (2016) along with Gandhi and Johnson (2016) both identified the scale to be valid and
reliable when measuring mentor competency in academia. They encouraged a wider application
of the tool to mentor programs across other disciplines. The Misener Nurse Practitioner Job
Satisfaction Scale (MNPJSS) was used in the Horner (2017) study looking at the satisfaction of
the NP. Horner (2017) found that mentoring impacted the satisfaction and competency level of
the experienced NP and the novice NP, the mentor and mentee. The other studies utilized
independent open-ended questions to elicit information on the competency of the mentor, the
effect mentorship had on the mentor and mentee, and satisfaction with the process.
Gerhart (2012) and Harrington (2011) completed a literature appraisal and found that NPs
reported mentorship needs above and beyond their clinical competence. The newly graduated NP
wanted support on navigating the culture of the organization, balancing work/life, and
overcoming fear and anxiety as they transition to practice. Further evidence did not support the
use of mentorship to improve the clinical knowledge of the mentee. Clinical knowledge was
shown to be the work of a preceptor or fellowship/residency program (Brook, Aitken, Webb,
MacLaren, & Salmon, 2019; Robeano & Taylor, 2019).
Evidence-Based Practice Model

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

10

In 2018, Kotter International, Inc. modified their original change theory by identifying
eight accelerators and four change principles (see Appendix C). Kotter’s theory states that
successful change for a person, organization, or philosophy is based on a clear vision that is
communicated to the group repeatedly to reinforce the change. Kotter also identified that
members of the organization need to be rewarded throughout the change process, managers need
to remove obstacles, and leaders need to validate that the change outcomes are anchored into the
organizational culture (Kotter, 2014). With the support of the Arizona State Board of Nursing, all
9,000 actively licensed NPs in the state received an invitation to participate in online mentoring
program. The support of the Arizona State Board of Nursing allowed all NPs licensed in the state
to participate in the mentor educational session, meeting objective number 2 of Kotter’s theory to
build a guiding coalition. Arizona NPs are known for their strong support and connection of each
other. This project looked at the state of Arizona as a Meta organization that can support NPs
across the state, which will in turn support their organization. As NPs participate in the program,
they take their knowledge of mentoring into their workplaces, thus helping to enact a strategic
vision for NPs in the state. Many NPs know each other across organizations and in the state,
networking through professional organizations and supporting the work of AzNA (Arizona
Nurses Association) and the Board of Nursing. Kotter also emphasis the need to enlist a
volunteer army and create actions to remove barriers. Those who participated in the project can
realize a personal accomplishment that in turn encourages acceleration, institutional adoption,
and change.
National organizations, for example NLN (National League for Nurses) and AANP
(American Academy of Nurses Practitioners), are also starting to work towards common goals by
providing national-level resources for healthcare organizations. AANP is utilizing web-based

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

11

educational sessions to provide resources in in a more efficient way. These organizations have
captured the “Big Opportunity” to use technology and their resources to support small and large
organizations across the country. This project used that technology to meet the needs of Arizona
NPs.
Guiding Theory
Self-efficacy and outcome expectations can be strengthened, and positive outcomes of
career goals can be formed (Bandura, 1977). Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (see Appendix
D) serves as the conceptual framework for this project and emphasizes the social origin of
behaviors in addition to the cognitive thought processes that influence human behaviors and
functioning. Bandura's theory holds that behavior occurs as a result of the interplay between
cognitive and environmental factors. Social Cognitive Theory combines self-efficacy and
outcome expectations through self-observation, self-regulation, self-efficacy and reciprocal
determinism (Bandura, 2001; Gandhi & Johnson, 2016; Jnah & Robinson, 2015). Scholars also
believe that behavior is learned from the environment through the process of observational
learning, self-efficacy and outcome expectations can be strengthened, and positive outcomes of
career goals can be formed (Bandura, 2001; Gandhi & Johnson, 2016; Hayes, 1998; Jacobson &
Sherrod, 2012; Jnah & Robinson, 2015).
The overarching goal of the project was to support and strengthen the mentor’s
competency and improve the self-efficacy of the senior nurse practitioner, thus increasing
satisfaction and commitment to the organization. Assumptions within Bandura’s theory include
that students are goal driven individuals who learn and adopt new behaviors through observation
(Jnah & Robinson, 2015). For NPs to participate in the study, they needed to engage their
personal factors (Bandura, 1977), identifying a gap in their own knowledge about mentoring and

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

12

desiring to develop new behaviors. As the NP moved through the educational program, he/she d
engaged their own behavior (Bandura, 1977) by identifying their skill level, complexity of the
situation, and the duration of their experience within the program. After they completed the
learning module, the NPs then determined how to take the newly acquired knowledge into their
environment (Bandura, 1977) through newly developed roles and relationships.
Methods
The pilot study protocol was reviewed by the Arizona State University Institutional
Review Board and approved as exempt from full board review (see Appendix E).
Participant selection was based on existing de-identified baseline administrative data from
demographics about the Nurse Practitioner workforce in Arizona provided by the Arizona State
Board of Nursing (ASBN, 2019). This information was used to identify current actively
practicing nurse practitioners, those retired in the past five years, and those within one year of
licensure. The information provided a reference point for numbers of active NPs to include in the
project. Further inclusion criteria included nurse practitioners who had an active RN and APRN
license in Arizona, have worked as an NP for over three years, are over 18 years of age, and
speak/write English. Nurse Practitioners were contacted via email through the Arizona Board of
Nursing’s licensee database. NPs who worked in their role less than three years were omitted
from the data.
Once at the website, participants reviewed the consent agreement and, if they chose to
continue, proceeded with registration and login to the Mentor site where the pre-survey
demographic/MCA was listed along with three recorded video sessions. The three video sessions
(Open Communication & Accessibility; Mutual Respect & Trust; Independence & Collaboration)
lasted 20-25 minutes each. Downloadable PDFs of the slides were available to the participant.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

13

After completion of the three videos, the participant was invited to join a live 60-minute session
to discuss what they learned, share experiences, and set a specific goal for the next 90 days.
After completion of the live session, the participant took the post-MCA survey (see Appendix F,
educational design flow sheet). If the participants completed the post-evaluation questionnaire,
they had the opportunity to receive a CNE certificate in their email for 2.0 CEUs (see Appendix
G, CNE evaluation and Appendix H, certification). The continuing nursing education activity
was approved by the Continuing Nursing Education Group, an accredited approver by the
American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation. Participants' email
addresses were collected to deliver the continuing nurse education certificate. Data was analyzed
using SPSS 23.
The demographic survey consisted of eight questions which defined the project sample
and ten mentor specific questions (see Appendix I). Participants completed a pre/post survey
using a modified Mentor Competency Assessment Scale (MCA) (see Appendix J). The Mentor
Competency Assessment Scale (MCA) was originally developed for use in research mentoring
programs (Fleming, et al., 2013). The data from the 26-item scale is used to assess skill level of
mentors across six competency domains (maintaining effective communication, aligning
expectations, assessing understanding, fostering independence, addressing diversity and
promoting professional development) (Fleming, et. al, 2013). The scale was modified for this
project, with permission of the scale author, by removing items unique to research faculty.
The modified MCA was combined with eight demographic questions and ten initial
mentor screening questions to create a thirty-six-question survey (see Appendix I & Appendix J).
Participants received an invitation to participate via email from the Arizona State Board of
Nursing NP List serve and were directed via a link to the project website. Flyers were sent to

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

14

Arizona professional nursing organizations and local health systems for distribution (see
Appendix K, flyer). No outside funding for the pilot project was received (see Appendix L,
budget).
Results
The pilot educational program was conducted with a total of seven experienced nurse
practitioners. Seventeen completed the Mentor Competency Assessment pre-survey and
demographics, but only seven completed the three online modules, post MCA and CNE
education evaluation questionnaire. Of those seven, only two participants completed the live 60minute webinar. Due to the small sample size, the planned 60-day follow up questionnaire on
the participants experience with using the tools learned in the online modules was not
implemented. The majority of the study population were female (71.43%), between the age of 55
and 59 years (42.86%). Years of experience as an RN ranged from 1 year to over 20 years, years
of experience as an NP also ranged from 4 years to over 20 years. The remainder of the
demographic data can be found in Appendix M.
Over half (57.14%) of the respondents reported they had received mentorship training
prior to the pilot project. Only two (28.57%) reported actively participating in a mentoring
relationship and all reported actively serving as a preceptor. Participants noted that mentor
relationships were mostly formal and within the same organization. The remainder of the
demographic and mentor data can be found in Appendix M and N.
No statistically significant relationships were found in total scores between the pre and
post survey. However, 43% of the respondents reported that their strategies to improve
communication with mentees improved from moderately skilled to extremely skilled. Two
clinically significant themes were identified from participant comments on the CNE evaluations:

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

15

mentors need to help the mentees set achievable goals and the mentors need to be engaged active
listeners.
Discussion
This project was a direct result of the desire to improve the senior nurse practitioner’s
confidence with mentoring using an online asynchronous educational platform. Due to a limited
response, additional projects are needed to evaluate the most effective method of delivery to
enhance senior NPs’ confidence with mentoring. Kotter’s (2014) change principles support that
multiple methods of learning are necessary for change, so evaluation of educational programs
within organizations, continuing education programs, on demand/podcast lectures, etc. should be
investigated to help support the growing nurse practitioner workforce and their mentors. Further
studies are also needed on the motivation to improve mentorships skills and the
benefits/incentives that encourage engagement. The awareness of self and the ability to identify
gaps in knowledge will guide individuals to training and participation in educational programs,
however, without this insight, individuals may not fully understand their need for training
(Horner, 2017).
Limitations, Barriers, and Challenges
The project was limited to experienced nurse practitioners in Arizona. This pilot study
measured educational effectiveness of an online learning platform at one-point in time and is not
generalizable to other learning modalities. Although the recruitment email was sent to over 9,000
nurse practitioners in the state of Arizona, only seventeen responded to the request for
participation. Timing and conflicting emails may have contributed to the low response rate.
Request for participation was sent near the winter holidays and multiple other emails were sent
from the Arizona Board of Nursing in the same time period, potentially creating confusion.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

16

Direct communications with NPs through conferences, site visits and connections within
organizations may improve the response rate for future initiatives.
Selection bias may have impacted the outcome. The small number of mentors in the
study may have differed from those who did not participate.
Project Impact and Sustainability
The Arizona Board of Nursing has requested the three recorded modules be made
available to hospitals, medical groups and schools of nursing to improve mentoring knowledge.
The Arizona Board of Nursing supports advanced practices nurses in the state through
committees, workgroups and advisory opinions. The educational design of this project will be
made available to the Board for integration through their Advanced Practice Committees to
create a statewide tool that organizations can use to mentor experienced nurse practitioners and
modify for other advanced practice nurses. The long-range goal will be to modify the educational
program to support all levels of nursing mentorship.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

17

References
American Association of Nurse Practitioners. (2017). More than 234,000 licensed nurse
practitioners in the United States [Press Release]. Retrieved from
https://www.aanp.org/192-press-room/2017-press-releases/2098-more-than-234-000licensed-nurse-practitioners-in-the-united-states
American Nurses Credentialing Center. (2017). 2019 Magnet application manual. Silver Spring,
MD: American Nurses Credentialing Center
Arizona State Board of Nursing. (2019). Licensee Data [Data file].
Bandura A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review. 84(2):191–215.
Bandura A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology. 52(1): 1-26.
Brook, J., Aitken, L., Webb, R., MacLaren, J., & Salmon, D. (2019). Characteristics of successful
interventions to reduce turnover and increase retention of early career nurses: A
systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 91, 47-59.
doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.11.003
Busen, N. & Engebreston, J. (1998). Mentoring in advanced practice nursing: The use of
metaphor in concept exploration. The Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice,
2(2), 1-7.
Dean, A.G. (2017). Supporting advanced practice provider transition to practice: A theoretical
and evidenced-based intervention (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Arizona State
University, Arizona.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

18

Eller, L., Lev, E., and Feurer, A. (2014). Key components of an effective mentoring relationship:
A qualitative study. Nurse Education Today, 34(5), 815-820.
doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.07.020.
Faraz, A. (2017). Novice nurse practitioner workforce transition and turnover intention in
primary care. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 29(1), 26-34.
doi:10.1002/2327-6924.12381
Faraz, A. (2019). Facilitators and barriers to the novice nurse practitioner workforce transition in
primary care. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 31(6), 364370.
Fellows of the American Association of the Nurse Practitioners FAANP (2006, May 2).
Invitational think tank: Mentoring assessment. Retrieved from
https://storage.aanp.org/www/documents/fellows/MentoringAssessment.pdf
Fleming, M., House, S., Shewakramani, V., Yu, L., Garbutt, J., McGee, R., … Rubio, D. M.
(2013). The mentoring competency assessment: Validation of a new instrument to
evaluate skills of research mentors. Academic Medicine : Journal of the Association of
American Medical Colleges, 88(7), 1002–1008.
doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318295e298
Gandhi, M., & Johnson, M. (2016). Creating more effective mentors: Mentoring the mentor.
AIDS and Behavior, (20) Suppl. 2, 294-303. doi:10.1007/s10461-016-1364-3
Ghosh, R., & Reio, T. G., Jr. (2013). Career benefits associated with mentoring for mentors: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(1), 106-116.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2013.03.011

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

19

Gottlieb, M., Fant, A., King, A., et al. (2017, November 1). One click away: Digital mentorship
in the modern era. Cureaus, 9(11), 1-7. doi:10.7759/cureus.1838
Hayes, E. F. (1998). Mentoring and nurse practitioner student self-efficacy. Western Journal of
Nursing Research, 20(5), 521–535. doi.org/10.1177/019394599802000502
Horner, K.D. (2017). Mentoring: Positively influencing job satisfaction and retention of new hire
nurse practitioners. Plastic Surgical Nursing, 37(1), 7-22.
doi:10.1097/PSN.0000000000000169
Jacobson, S., & Sherrod, D. (2012). Transformational mentorship models for nurse
educators. Nursing Science Quarterly, 25(3), 279-284.
Jarrell, L. (2016). Professional development and mentorship deeds of nurse practitioners. Journal
for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(1), 26-32.
doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000160
Jnah, A. J., & Robinson, C. B. (2015). Mentoring and self-efficacy: Implications for the neonatal
nurse practitioner workforce. Advances in Neonatal Care, 15(5), E3-E11.
Jones, S. J. (2017). Establishing a nurse mentor program to improve nurse satisfaction and intent
to stay. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 33(2), 76-78.
doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000335
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kotter, J. P. (2014). Accelerate: Building strategic agility for a faster-moving world.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lafleur, A.K., & White, B.J. (2010). Appreciating mentorship: The benefits of being a mentor.
Professional Case Management, 15(6), 312-313.

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

20

Lau, C., Ford, J., Van Lieshout, R. J., Saperson, K., McConnell, M., & McCabe, R. (2016).
Developing mentoring competency: Does a one session training workshop have impact?
Academic Psychiatry, 40(3), 429-433. doi:10.1007/s40596-016-0537-8
Meier, S. (2013). Concept analysis of mentoring. National Association of Neonatal Nurses,
13(5), 341-345. doi:10.1097/ANC.0b013e3182a14ca4
Minnick, W., Wilhide, S., Diantoniis, R., Goodheart, T., Logan, S., & Moreau, R. (2014).
Onboarding OSH professionals: The role of mentoring. Professional Safety, 59(12), 2733.
Taylor, A., Broyhill, S., Burris, M., & Wilcox, A. (2017). A Strategic approach for developing
an advanced practice workforce: From postgraduate transition-to-practice fellowship
programs and beyond. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 11-19.
doi:10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000198
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration,
National Center for Health Workforce Analysis. (2016). National and regional projections
of supply and demand for primary care practitioners: 2013-2025. Rockville, Maryland.
Retrieved from https://bhw.hrsa.gov/health-workforce-analysis/research/projections
Zhang, Y., Qean, Y., Wu, J., & Wen, F. (2016). The effectiveness and implementation of
mentoring program for newly graduated nurses: A systematic review. Nurse Education
Today, 37, 136-144. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2015.11.027

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

21
Appendix A

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Gandhi, M. et.al
(2016). Creating
more effective
mentors:
Mentoring the
mentor.

Social Cognitive
Career Theory
(adaptation of
Social Cognitive
Theory)

Design:
QuasiExperimental

N – 67, convenience
sample
Pre/post – no control
group

Cross-Sectional
Survey
(pre/post);

Country: USA
Funding:
NIMH/NIH
Bias:
Response &
Sampling

Purpose:
Mentor training
improves
mentor skills,
improving
outcomes for
mentees

Demographics:
f (73%) m (27%)
Disciplines:
Medicine (42%);
Nursing (8%);
Social Sciences
(21%); other 29%
Setting: University
CA San Francisco,
2-day M workshop
Inclusion: AR @
mid and senior
level; active role M;
HIV researchers

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVIV1: wkshp for
M
DV1: Effective
communication
DV2: Aligning
expectations
DV3: Assessing
understanding
DV4: Fostering
independence
DV5:
Addressing
diversity
DV6: Promoting
development

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Mentor
Competency
Assessment

*p < .05;

DV1: **
Mean 4.7-5.5
sig ↑↑

(pre, post 1-2
weeks after
workshop)

***p < .00
1

**p < .01;

DV2: **
Mean 4.6-5.4
sig ↑↑

t tests
DV3: *
Mean 4.5-5.1
sig ↑
DV4: **
Mean 4.9-5.6
sig ↑↑
DV5: ***
Mean 4.7-5.6
sig ↑ ↑ ↑

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
LOE: VI
Strengths: use of
SCCT, validated
tool MCA
Weaknesses: data
was taken over 2year period,
potential error with
1 workshop in
10/2013 and 2nd in
5/2015. Paired t test
data NS,
Conclusions: all 6
components of
mentoring success
were statistically
significant

DV6: **
Mean 4.6-5.4

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

22

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Exclusion: limited
participation to keep
classes small
Minnick, W, et.
al. (2014).
Onboarding
Occupational
Safety & Health
Professionals

Job Embeddedness

Design: QE
MM

N =306,
convenience sample
 91/306 Mentors
 65/91
responded to
qualitative
survey

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVTime frame: NS

Measurement/
Instrumentation

IV: M Program

Qualitative:
 What
interactions
w/your M
were not value
added?
 What
interactions
w/your M
were most
effective/helpf
ul?
 Think back to
when you first
joined the
company.
What type of
M activities

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

sig ↑↑

SPSS; Chi
square
analysis for
quantitative
portion;

DV1 & DV2 =
NSD .820 (p >
.05)

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Feasibility:
feasible

LOE: VI
Strengths:
DV1: LC w/o M
Demographics
LC is defined as
generalizable to
Purpose:
examine
the time it takes
DV4 = sig 33.8
workers in
whether OSU
to perform job
(p < .05)↑
construction /
professionals in
skills and tasks
Cramer's V
manufacturing /
Country: USA
a mentoring
and is
ES .372,
oil/gas; ability to
program
independent of
Qualitative: medium
replicate qualitative
Demographics:
Funding: NS
influence
being M
content
portion of study to
m/f- 85%/15%
learning curve
analysis
DV3=77%
any industry
Construction: 44%
Bias: Sampling
and intent to
stated negative
Weaknesses: study
Manufacturing: 23% DV2: LC w/M
stay
LC
length
impact
on
ITS
was recall based;
Oil/Gas: 33%
associated w/
w/o M
Missing data to
being M
replicate questioner;
Setting: ASSE
Qualitative:
missing data on
professions from all
DV3: ITS w/o M
1. Regardless
literature review;
over USA
of
refences were
DV4: ITS w/M
interaction, outdated
Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

23

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Inclusion:
employed as OSH,
member of ASSE

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

would have
been most
helpful?

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

2.

Exclusion: Retired;
contractor;
consultant; trainer

3.

anything is
valuable
30% stated
cultural
navigation
most
important.
13%
coaching/ad
vice.12%
support
developing
partnership
s
Person who
where not
M. 46%
wanted help
w/cultural
navigation.
14%
support

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Conclusions: any
form/interaction of
M valuable for
retention; not
helpful with LC;
Cultural navigation
of organization was
greatest value add
for being M; second
was coaching /
advice/ performance
expectations
Feasibility: use of
large database of
ASSE members and
online format was
+, tools used were
appropriate, able to
replicate

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

24

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice

with job
shadowing
Horner, D.
(2017).
Mentoring:
Positively
influencing job
satisfaction and
retention of new
hire nurse
practitioners
Country: USA
Funding: NS
Bias: selection
bias & response

Watson
Caring
Model (1988)

Design: Crosssectional
survey; QE;
Convenience
sample
Purpose: Does
M ↑ influence
NP JS?

N=69; n=37
Demographics:
f/100%
Setting: regional
primary care clinics
and hospitals
Inclusion: C NP;
English Speaking
Exclusion: PA,
other APPs, nonEnglish speaking

IV1- M
Program
DV1-JS
Job satisfaction
DV2-MIC
Improved
competency of
mentor
Variables:
Years in practice
Years as RN
NP Specialty
Experience
One-time post
survey

MNPJSS (2001);
Cronhach’s α 0.96;
0.79-0.94 subscales
Mentorship Quality
(nonstandard – not
tested);
Questions –
*Did you find M
beneficial
*Did this
relationship
positively influence
your JS?

SPSS, OneWay
ANOVA;
Cross
Tabulation

DV1 - ↑JS 4.4
vs. 4.39, sig
DV2 - MIC 91.89% ↑, sig
M valuable 100%
M themes *constructive
feedback;
*shared
knowledge;
*available;
*encouraging

LOE: VI
Strengths: 2/3 of
participants on job
>3 years; reliable
instruments; solid
methodology
Weaknesses:
perception, recall
based; not
generalizable to PA
or other APPs;
small regional study
Conclusions: Any
form or length of M
perceived as
valuable

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

25

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Feasibility: feasible

Eller, et al.
(2014). Key
Components of an
effective
mentoring
relationship: a
qualitative study

Psychometric
theory

Design:
Qualitative
Study

N=694 n=451

IV = Mentor
Competency
DV1 =
Competency as
professional

MCCM Researchers
created
questionnaire from
literature-based
evidence, 142 item
questionnaires
were used in pilot
study to check
validity. After
analysis 43 items

SPSS
descriptive
statistics
exploratory
factor
analysis

Final
Cronbach's α =
0.994;
DV1 = sig ↑
0.773

LOE = VI

Country: USA

Purpose:
identify key
components of
effective
mentoring in
academia

Demographics:
MW - midwives in
Japan.
f=100%; age 20-30
59.2%; clinical
experience 13.4 +/9.0 years
23.7% current M

DV2=competenc
y as an educator
DV3=Personal
characteristics

DV2 = sig ↑
0.923
DV3 = sig ↑
0.863

Strengths: rigor
used to develop
questions for
validity, large N,
Weakness:
Conclusion:

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

26

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Funding: NIH,
GMS

Time Frame:2
months

Bias: selection
bias, response,
diversity

Inclusion: MW who
has been mentoring
more than 1 year &
new MW

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Country: USA
Funding: None

Kram's mentor role
theory &
Interpersonal
relationship theory

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

discarded, 99
remained for final
MCCM
questionnaire.
After pilot of
MCCM, analyzed
77. 19 more
questions removed
to improve
Cronbach α leaving
41 questions to
assess MCCM
(Mentoring
Competency of
Clinical Midwives)

Exclusion: - nonmidwife

Replace with
Faraz

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Design: QE

N=472;

IV = M

Purpose: to
determine the
role of
mentorship

University faculty
White 85.5%;
m/ 55.6%;
10.6 yos;

DV1 = JS, job
satisfaction

M Quantity - 1?
"#M"; M Quality 3 item Allen &
Eby's 5 item
mentorship quality;
M Satisfaction - 3

Findings/
Results

9 sub-factors,
all significant
(0.670-0.891)
Factor
contribution for
each concept
was 39.0-42.7%

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Feasibility:
feasible, would be
good to replicate
using tool to
determine
generalizability

9 Sub-factors
44.0 – 81.2%

SPSS
VIF <10 /
Tolerance
>.10 initial

DV1, DV2,
DV3 – NSD
difference w/ #
of mentors

LOE: VI
Strengths: solid N;
reliable instruments;
solid methodology;
potentially

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

27

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Bias: selection
bias & response

Lau, C. et al.
(2016).
Developing
mentoring
competency: Does
a one session
training workshop
have impact?

Not stated can be
generalizable to
competency-based
learning;
continuing
education

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

quantity, quality
and satisfaction
related to job
satisfaction,
commitment
and intent to
stay.

60% reporting
having a M (Quality/Satisfaction
was tested on this
group n=284)

Design: QE Mixed study /
Post-test
Purpose: To
determine if a
1/2-day
mentoring
course would

N=43 n=36 (84%);
Demographics:
M 69%/mentee
31%;
MD 28%, RN 8%;
Psychologist 36%;
other 28%;

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVDV2 = C,
commitment
DV3=T, intent to
stay

IV-Mentoring
Competency
DV1 = M
competency after
1 wkshp

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

item scale/4?
Ragines et al.
satisfaction with
M; JS - 2
questions;
Affective
Commitment Allen & Meyer's 8
item affective
commitment scale;
Turnover - 3?s

Analysis common
method
bias not
seen;

DV1, DV2,
DV3 - sig ↑
with mentor’s
knowledge
DV1 - sig ↑
w/M .24

Mentoring
Competency
Assessment
(MCA);

SPSS; twoway
ANOVA, t
test;
qualitative
- unique
identifiers;
p≤0.05

Mentorship
Knowledge Test
(MKT); Program

CI 95%,
bootstrap
bias 0

DV2 - sig ↑
w/M .11
DV3 - sig ↑
w/M -.21;

DV1= mean
4.48 vs 5.02
pre/post;
F(1,31)=18.4 ↑
DV2 =
t(27)=0.512,
p=0.613 ↓

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
generalizable to PA
and APP
Weaknesses:
regional study
Conclusions:
Satisfaction with
mentoring was more
meaningful then
quantity or quality
of mentoring;
Feasibility: feasible
LOE: VI
Strengths: reliable
instruments; solid
methodology;
potentially
generalizable to PA
and APP mentors.

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

28

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Country: Canada
Funding: None
Bias: Self-Report

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

result in
improved
measure of
mentor
competency.

Academic Medicine
(Faculty, Staff and
trainees)
Neuroscience
department regional
hospital/clinic

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVDV2 = M
knowledge after
1 wkshp

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Evaluation pre/post

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Weaknesses:
regional study,
limited literature
review, lack of
control group, small
sample size.
Conclusions:
Mentoring
workshop for 1/2
day ↑
mentor/mentee
competency post
program; ↑
mentor/mentee
difficult
conversations and
working with
diversity. MCA can
be used as an
effective means to
measure

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

29

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
competency in 1/2day workshop.
Feasibility:
feasible, speaks to
possible time for
future studies and
financial impact of
mentorship
programs

Gisbert-Trejo, N.
et al. (2019).
Determining
effective mentor
characteristics in
interorganizational
mentoring for
managers: An
approach based on
academics and

Kram's mentor role
theory and
functions (CF, PF,
RM) (1985) &
Nonaka
Organizational
knowledge creation
(1994)

Design: Mixed
Method
(Literature
analysis to
determine 1°
and 2° M
Characteristics;
Delphi analysis
relevance from
expert opinion;
and exploratory

N=125 (17.9% rr);
Demographics:
51 M, 62 mentee, 12
program
coordinators
22 yos,
m 50.4%, f 49.6%
Setting: 12.8%
work in industry,

IV1 = MC
(mentor
characteristics)
DV1 - Mentor;
DV2 - Mentee;
DV3 - Program
Coordinator –
once MC were
identified they

LR - 110 articles
(11/2016-5/2017)
Scopus & Web of
Science; Delphi Snowball sampling
of 19 experts, from
experienced M,
across the region

Delphi,
BrownForsythe
w/Bonferro
ni post hoc;
EFA
(69.48%
Variance);
KaiserMeyerOlkin

29 M
characteristics
identified with
the EFA noting
7 factors; no
significance
difference
between
DV1,2,3 for 28
questions;
difference

LOE: VI
Strengths: reliable
instruments; solid
methodology;
potentially
generalizable to PA
and APP mentors.
Weaknesses:
regional study, lack

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

30

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

practitioners'
perspective
Country: Spain
Funding: US
17/14 University
of the Basque
Country
(UPV/EHU).
Bias: no random
sample of experts.
Brook, J. et al.
(2019).
Characteristics of
successful
interventions to
reduce turnover
and increase
retention of early
career nurses: A
systematic review

NS

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

factor analysis
to classify M
characteristics
in interorganizational
(IO) M.)

12% energy, 12%
IT, 12% consults,
8% RD, 43.2% other

Purpose:
identify,
classify, and
value the main
MC inter
organization
Design: SR
Method:
Medline, HPR,
EMBASE,
PsychInfo,
CINAHL,
Cochran.

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVwere compared
to Frequency
seen in literature,
respondent’s
response, and
Kram's functions
(CF, PF and
RD).

Measurement/
Instrumentation

N= 11, 656 n=53
eligible studies

IV1 -Time of
Mentor program

Time: 2001-2017,
repeat search
4/2018, no new
yields

IV2 -Type of
Mentor
(preceptor,
mentor,
residency)

PRISMA; JBICA No meta-analysis,
narrative summary
of characteristics;
two types of
analysis - 1.
interventions 2.
components

Inclusion:
participated in
IOMP

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

(0.837,
sample
adequacy)

between
mentee/PC
regarding
coaching;
difference found
between
Intra/Inter
organizational
literature
characteristics

percent
improveme
nt
difference

IV1:Time:
DV1: @ 26 wks
sig ↑ 9.3%
DV1 @ 27-52
wks sig ↑13.3%

Exclusion: no
experience with M
and no desire to be a
mentee

DV2 @ 26
weeks sig ↑6%
median ↑;

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
of control group,
Conclusions:
Positive
advancement on the
impact of mentoring
on the transfer of
knowledge through
mentors. Selection
of M focus on
experience,
relationship skills
and motivation.
LOE: 1
Strengths:
Evidence of
prereview
correlation between
reviewers for
accuracy, use of
PRISMA and

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

31

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Country: USA
Funding: Burdett
Trust for Nursing
Grant
Bias: Publication
Bias

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Terms:
(retain*,
retention,
attrition, leav*,
turnover, quit,
loyalty) and
(staff,
personnel,
employee,
workforce) and
nurs*

Demographics:
57% new grad RNs,
# of RNs Median 90

Purpose:
evaluate
successful
interventions to
promote
retention and
reduce turnover
of early career
nurses

Exclusion: articles
prior to 2000

Inclusion: all LOE,
PR; English; studies
contain
reduce/increase
attrition, data
w/attrition/retention/
turnover rates

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVIV3 –
Characteristics
of Mentor
(preceptor,
mentor,
teaching)
DV1 = Turnover
DV2 = Retention

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

DV2 @ 27-52
weeks sig ↑
31%
IV2: Type
( Preceptorship)
DV1-9.2% sig
↑ , DV2 - no
effect;
IV2: Type
(Mentorship)
DV1 = 13.7% ↑
DV2 = 17.1% ↑;
(Residency)
DV1 = 18.6% ↑
DV2 = 19.5% ↑
IV3:
Characteristics
(Preceptorship)
DV1 = 9.5% ↑ ,
DV2 = 20.5% ↑;

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Joanna Briggs
criteria
Weakness: no
mention of author's
competency to
review studies;
Many studies
reviewed did not
have quality data to
extract, not all
studies did pre/post,
and multiple mixed
methods without
rigor. To help with
Publication Bias,
reviewed
unpublished grey lit.
Conclusions:
Orientation/TTP
program lasting 2752 weeks with

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

32

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

(Mentorship)
DV1 = 13% ↑
DV2 = 17.1% ↑;
(Teaching)
DV1 = 11.9% ↑
DV2 = 20% ↑

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
teaching, preceptor
and mentor
component.
Feasibility: APPs
have similar
turnover/retention
data for new
graduate RNs, the
evidence of a
mentor program and
its value to turnover
and retention are
valid.
Recommendation is
27-52 weeks, this
will limit feasibility
due to cost of
orientation/TTP, but
possible with
mentorship beyond
orientation?

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

33

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Zhang, Y. et al.
(2016). The
effectiveness and
implementation of
mentoring
program for
newly graduated
nurses: A
systematic review.

NS

Design: SR

N= 347 n=9

Method:
Cochrane,
Medline Ovid,
Elsevier,
Embase,
CINAHL,
CBM, CNKI &
WanFang.

Time: no restriction

Country: China
Funding:
Shanghai Nursing
Association &
Shanghai Jiao
Tong University
Bias: Publication
Bias

Terms: newly
graduated
nurse, new
graduate nurse,
new nurse
graduate, newly
qualified nurse,
newly
registered
nurse, novice
nurse, new
nurse, mentor,

Demographics:
new grad RNs, SS
19-450

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVIV = Mentoring
Program

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Joanna Briggs
Institute (2008)

DV1 Turnover: 44%
of studies ↓;

DV1= turnover

3 review authors

percent
improveme
nt
difference

DV2= cost
effectiveness

No meta-analysis,
narrative summary
of characteristics

Inclusion: all LOE,
PR; English &
Chinese; studies
contain details of
mentoring program

DV3= job
satisfaction

Exclusion: literature
review, grey
literature, nsg
interventions that
don't mention
mentoring,
interventions with
preceptorship and
no mentoring.

DV5= SelfEfficacy/Stress
Reduction

DV4= RN
Competency

DV2 - Cost
Effectiveness:
22% of studies
saw cost
savings
>$330,000
annually;
DV3 - Job
Satisfaction:
44% of studies
saw ↑;
DV4 - RN
Competence:
33% of studies
saw ↑;

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
LOE: 1
Strengths: use of
Joanna Briggs
criteria for analysis
Weakness: no
mention of author's
competency to
review studies;
Many studies
reviewed did not
have quality data to
extract, not all
studies did pre/post,
and multiple mixed
methods without
rigor. Did not
review unpublished
grey lit or articles
outside of USA &
China. data analysis
of articles was not

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

34

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

mentoring,
mentorship,
transition and
orientation.
Purpose:
evaluate
mentoring
programs

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

DV5 - 66% saw
improvement in
stress reduction,
confidence, &
self-efficacy

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
completed,
restatement of
articles, rather than
analysis
Conclusions: small
sample size of
articles, however
SR showed +
outcomes for
mentor programs to
facilitate TTP
Feasibility: APPs
have similar
turnover/retention
data for new
graduate RNs, the
evidence of a
mentor program
generalizable to
TTP for the APP.

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

35

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Ghosh, R. et al.
(2013). Career
benefits
associated with
mentoring for
mentors: A metaanalysis.

Z's mentor role
theory and
functions (CF, PF,
RM) (1985)

Design: SR
with MA

N= 18 eligible
studies

Method:
PsychINFO,
ABI/INFORM,
ProQuest
Dissertations/T
heses; reference
lists; conference
proceedings for
unpublished;
and expert
scholars for inpress works

Time: 2000-2012

Country: USA
Funding: NS
Bias:

Terms: mentor,
mentoring
benefits,
mentor's
subjective
career success,
mentor's job

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVIV1=career
outcome &
mentors vs. nonmentors;

Inclusion: sample
size must be
reported & Pearson
correlation or other
type of statistic
measuring the 3
mentor supports and
measure of effect
size

IV2= Career
Outcome &
career
mentoring;

Exclusion:
composite scores for
career and
psychosocial
functions together.

IV4 = Career
Outcome & role
modeling;

IV3 = Career
Outcome &
Psychosocial
mentoring;

IV5 = Career
Outcome &
mentoring
quality

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Hunter &
Schmidt's 2004
"bare-bones" metaanalysis method

correlation
coefficient
= effect
size (Mwr);
CI=95%; Q
statistic
(variability
distribution
of effect
size); file
drawer
analysis
(Hunter &
Schmidt,
1990).
Representi
ng a value
of "Failsafe k";
absolute
CV .01

IV1 - DV1 ↑
Mwr = .123;
DV2 ↑ Mwr
= .12;
DV3 - Mwr =
-.035 not
significant CI
(-.09 to .02);
IV2 - DV4 ↑
Mwr = .269;
DV5 ↑ Mwr
= .44; DV1
Mwr = .149 not
significant CI
(.002 to .30);
DV2 Mwr
= .145 not

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
LOE: 1
Strengths:
Evidence of
prereview
correlation between
reviewers for
accuracy. MA
method is reliable
and valid Extensive
literature search and
review with
comprehensive
narrative and
background
Weakness: no
mention of author's
competency to
review studies; no
mention of number
of records identified
at initial search

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

36

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

performance,
mentor's job
satisfaction,
mentor's
organizational
commitment,
and mentor's
objective career
success.
Purpose:
identify what
might motivate
individuals to
engage in
mentoring
relationships as
mentors.

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDVDV1=Job
Satisfaction;

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

significant CI
(.002 to.29);

DV2=Organizati
onal
Commitment;

DV3 Mwr =
-.02 not
significant CI
(.20-.16);

DV3=Turnover
Intent;

IV3 – DV1 ↑
Mwr = .154;

DV4=Job
Performance;

DV2 ↑ Mwr
= .216; DV5 ↑
Mwr = .177;

DV5=Career
Success

DV3 Mwr =
-.125 not
significant CI
(-.07 to .32);
DV4 Mwr
= .133 not

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice
Conclusions:
Positive association
between mentoring
functions and career
success, negative
evidence for
mentoring and
turnover
Feasibility: MA
review supports the
concept that
mentors have
positive career
outcomes, just as
mentees and
literature can be
used to validate
further study on
mentoring programs
and frameworks.

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

37

Table 1
Literature Review Evaluation Table
Citation

Theory/
Conceptual
framework

Design/
Method

Sample/ Setting
N=
n=

Major
Variables &
Definitions
IVDV-

Measurement/
Instrumentation

Data
Analysis
(stats
used)

Findings/
Results

Level/Quality of
Evidence; Decision
for practice/
application to
practice

significant CI
(-.02 to .22);
IV4 - DV1 ↑
Mwr = .085;
DV2 ↑ Mwr
= .249; IV5 –
DV1 ↑ Mwr
= .167; DV5 ↑
Mwr = .233;
fail-safe k - low
of 4 to high of
65, effect size
sufficient.
Q statistic
>5.991
significant

Key: APPs – Advanced Practice Providers; AR-Academic Rank; ASSE-American Society of Safety Professionals; C-certified; CI-confidence interval; DVdependent variable; E–Experience; ES-effect size; f-female; FNP-Family Nurse Practitioner; FM-Formal Mentoring; freq-frequency; IM-Informal Mentoring;
I-intervention; IOMP-Internal Organizational Mentor Program; ITS-Intent to Stay; IV-independent variable; JS-Job Satisfaction; LC-Learning Curve; LOELevel of Evidence; M-mentor/mentorship; m-male; MA-Meta-Analysis; MC-Mentoring Characteristics; MCA - Mentor Competency Assessment; MCCMMentoring Competency of Clinical Midwives; MIC-Mentor Improved Competency; MM-mixed method; MNPJSS-Misner Nurse Practitioner Job Satisfaction
Survey; MQ-Mentorship Quality; MW-Midwife; Mwr-Sample weighted mean; N-number of sample size; n-number of final participants; ND-not defined; NPNurse Practitioner; NSD-not significant; NS-Not Stated; NST-Nonstandard Tool; Ntl-National; OC-Organizational Commitment; OSH-Occupational safety and
health; p-Power; PA- Physician Assistant; QE-quasi-experimental; QMRS-Quality of Mentoring Relationship Scale; RN-Registered Nurse; SCCT-Social
Cognitive Career Theory; sig-significant; Sp-Specialty; SR-systematic review; SS-sample size; UK-unknown; USA-United States of America; w/-with; w/owithout; wkshp-workshop; wks-weeks

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

38

Appendix B

2019
Spain
MM
VI

Gosh, R. et al.

2016
Canada
QE
VI
36

Zang, Y. et al.

Basics
Industry
Demographics
Intervention
Outcomes

2014
USA
QE
VI

Brook, J. et
al.

73%

2015
Japan
QE
VI
451

Gisbert-Trejo,
N. et al.

% Female

2017
USA
CSS
VI
37

Lau, C. et al.

2014
USA
QE
VI

Xu, X. et al.

2016
USA
QE
VI

Hishinuma, Y.
et al.

Minnick, W. et
al.

Year
Location
Design
LOE
Healthcare
Business
Educational
Commercial

Studies

Horner, D.

Gandhi, M. et
al.

Table 2
Synthesis Table

2019
USA
SR
I
53

2016
China
SR
I
9

2013
USA
MA
I

125
18

472

67
306

Occupation

100%
Faculty

% Mentor

66%

15%

100%

44%
Construction
100% NP
23%
Manufacturing
30%

0%

100%

43%

100%
Midwife

100%
Faculty

24%

60%

NS

50%

NS

NS

36%
12% Energy
Psychologist
100% RN 100% RN
12% IT
28% MD 8%
8% RD
RN
69%

41%

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

↑

↑
↑

↑
≠

Mentor
Mentor program
Mentor character
Job Satisfaction
Intent to Stay
Organizational
Commitment
Job Performance
Career Success
Cost Savings
Competency
SelfEfficacy/Stress
Reduction
Knowledge
Retention

↑
↑

↑
≠

↑

↑

≠
↑
↑
↑

↑

↑

↑
↑

↑

↑

↑
≠

↑
↑

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix C
Figure 1
Kotter’s 8-Step Process for Leading Change

Image Source: used with permission Kotter International

39

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

40

Appendix D
Figure 2
Bandura Social Cognitive Theory
• Complexity of the situation
• skill level
• duration of experience

• Situation
• Roles
• Relationship

Behavior

Environmental
Factors

Key
Assumptions

Personal
Factors

• Mentor/Mentee goal driven
• Adoption of behaviors
through observation
• Reinforcement or criticism
can positively or negatively
affect learning

Image Source: adapted from Jnah & Broadus 2015, with permission

• Self-Efficacy
• Cognition
• Motivation

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix E
Figure 3
Arizona State University, Institutional Review Board

41

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix F
Figure 4
Educational Design Flow Sheet

42

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

43

Appendix G
Table 3
CNE Evaluation
How to be the MENTOR you wish you had
Arizona State University DNP Project
November – December 2019
1.

The learning outcome(s) for this activity was met: Because of this activity, the learner acquired
knowledge about how to improve their mentoring relationships with novice nurse practitioners.
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2. I found this activity worthwhile for my professional practice. (If you select “Disagree” or “Strongly
Disagree,” please provide a comment below.)
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Comments:
3. This activity will enhance my knowledge and skill as a nurse practitioner. (If you select “Disagree” or
“Strongly Disagree,” please provide a comment below.)
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Comments:

4. SPEAKER EVALUATION
Speaker Name: Heather Healy

Speaker Topic: Open Communication &
Accessibility

The speaker was knowledgeable about the topic:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The speaker provided the information in an interesting manner that facilitated my learning:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Additional comments for this presenter:
Speaker Name: Heather Healy

Speaker Topic: Mutual Respect & Trust

The speaker was knowledgeable about the topic:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The speaker provided the information in an interesting manner that facilitated my learning:

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Strongly Agree

Agree

44

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Additional comments for this presenter:
Speaker Name: Heather Healy

Speaker Topic: Independence & Collaboration

The speaker was knowledgeable about the topic:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The speaker provided the information in an interesting manner that facilitated my learning:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Additional comments for this presenter:
Speaker Name: Heather Healy

Speaker Topic: Live Discussion Case Study Review

The speaker was knowledgeable about the topic:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The speaker provided the information in an interesting manner that facilitated my learning:
Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Additional comments for this presenter:

5. As a result of this activity, please share at least one action you will take to change your professional
practice/performance.

6. Comments:

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix H
Figure 5
CNE Certification of Completion

45

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix I
Table 4
Demographic and Mentor Questions

DEMOGRAPHICS
1. What is your age group?
30 years
-34 years
-39 years
-44 years
-49 years
-54 years
-59 years
-64 years

2. What is your gender?

3. What is the highest degree you have earned?
-Nursing Masters

-nursing Doctorate
4. What is your Certification Area (if you hold more than one, select all applicable choices)?
– Adult
- Pediatrics
- Gerontological

46

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

5. How many years did you practice as a RN before working as a NP?
-3 years
- 8 years
- 12 years
- 17 years
- 20 years

6. How long have you worked as a NP?
-3 years
- 8 years
- 12 years
- 17 years
- 20 years

7. Select Your Primary Clinical Focus Area

8. Select Your Primary Work Setting

47

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

48

MENTOR QUESTIONS
DEFINITION - For the purposes of this study - a mentor is a more experienced person who helps a
newer professional with professional identity, role integration, systems navigation, and
organizational socialization.
A preceptor is typically a fellow employee tasked with showing a new employee policy and
procedures and providing some introductions. Preceptors may have an evaluation role. While a
preceptor relationship can develop into a mentoring relationship, not all precepting is mentoring.
When responding to the following items, please consider only the professional relationships that
did/do NOT have an evaluation or supervisory aspect.
9. In your RN or NP career, have you ever had a mentor (see definition above)?

10. In your RN or NP career, have you had previous mentorship training?

11. In your RN or NP career, have you been a mentor (see definition above)?

12. What type of mentorship relationship(s) have you experienced?
Please select ALL that apply.
or and/or mentee
Unique Identifier: (this will be done via survey monkey, to include their email address)

ns)

13. Are you currently in a mentoring relationship with a novice NP?

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

49

14. Do you serve as a clinical preceptor for NP students?

15. If Yes, how many students per academic year?
-2
-4
–6

16. Do you have teaching experience?

17. Do you have teaching certifications?
low)

18. Please share a brief description of any prior mentoring experiences that impacted your career
development (please describe below)

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

50

Appendix J
Table 5
Mentor Competency Assessment, modified from Fleming, et al., 2013
Pre/Post Questionnaire
Not at
all
skilled
1
 

  

 

  

 

 

Providing constructive feedback

 

  

 

  

 

 

Establishing a relationship based on
trust

 

  

 

  

 

 

Identifying and accommodating
different communication styles

 

  

 

  

 

 

Employing strategies to improve
communication with mentees

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

Considering how personal and
professional differences may impact
expectations

 

  

 

  

 

 

Helping mentees develop strategies
to meet professional goals

 

  

 

  

 

 

Motivating your mentees

 

  

 

  

 

 

Building mentees’ confidence

 

  

 

  

 

 

Building mentees’ confidence

 

  

 

  

 

 

Acknowledging your mentees’
professional contributions

 

  

 

  

 

 

Negotiating a path to professional
independence with your mentees

 

  

 

  

 

 

Working effectively with mentees
whose personal background is
different from your own (age, race,
gender, class, region, culture,
religion, family composition etc.)

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

Items
Active listening

Working with mentees to set clear
expectations of the mentoring
relationship
Aligning your expectations with your
mentees’

Helping your mentees network
effectively
Helping your mentees set career
goals

2

3

Moderately
skilled 4

5

6

Extremely
skilled 7

N/A

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix K
Figure 6
Project Flyer

51

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

52

Appendix L
Table 6
Budget
Expense Description
Website development
Website maintenance/hosting
Survey Monkey
CNE Application
Participation Email List
Total

Amount
$0.00
$119.88

$384.00
$250.00
$0.00
$753.88

Notes
Used free development
application
Monthly $9.99
Annual
2.0 CNEs
In collaboration with AzBON

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

53

Appendix M
Table 7
Demographics of Sample

Characteristics

Demographics
Frequency
%

Age
< 30 years
30-34 years
35-39 years
40-44 years
45-49 years
50-54 years
55-59 years
60-64 years
65+ years
Gender
Female
Male
Highest Level of
Education
Nursing Master’s
Non-Nursing Masters
DNP
Nursing PhD
Other Nursing Doctorate
Non-nursing Doctorate
NP Specialty
Acute Care – Adult
Acute Care - Pediatrics
Adult
Adult - Gerontological
Family
Hospice Palliative Care
Neonatal
Oncology
Pediatric
Psych/Mental Health
Urgent Care
Women’s Health
Years of Practice as RN
1 -3 years

Count

0.00%
0.00%
28.57%
28.57%
0.00%
0.00%
42.86%
0.00%
0.00%

0
0
2
2
0
0
3
0
0

71.43%
28.57%

5
2

42.86%
0.00%
42.86%
0.00%
0.00%
14.29%

3
0
3
0
0
1

28.57%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
57.14%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
14.29%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

28.57%

2

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
4 - 8 years
8 - 12 years
13 - 17 years
17 - 20 years
More than 20 years
Years of Practice as NP
1 -3 years
4 - 8 years
8 - 12 years
13 - 17 years
17 - 20 years
More than 20 years
Primary Clinical Focus
Area
Primary Care
Internal Medicine
Urgent Care
Cardiology
Psychiatric
OB/GYN
Surgical
Health Promotion
Emergency
Oncology
Other _______________
Other (please specify)
Primary Work Setting
Hospital Outpatient
Hospital Inpatient
Private Group Practice
Private Physician Practice
Community Health Center
Urgent Care
Private NP Practice
Rural Health Clinic
Federally Qualified Health
Center
Emergency Room
Other ________________
Other (please specify)

54

14.29%
28.57%
14.29%
0.00%
28.57%

1
2
1
0
2

0.00%
28.57%
28.57%
14.29%
0.00%
28.57%

0
2
2
1
0
2

57.14%
0.00%
14.29%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
14.29%
0.00%
14.29%

4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1

14.29%
14.29%
14.29%
0.00%
0.00%
14.29%
0.00%
14.29%

1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1

0.00%

0

0.00%
0.00%
28.57%

0
0
2

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS

55

Appendix N
Table 8
Mentor Specific Questions
Mentor Questions
Characteristics

Frequency %

Count

In your RN or NP career, have you ever had a mentor (see definition above)?
Yes
100.00%
No
0.00%
In your RN or NP career, have you had previous mentorship training?
Yes
57.14%
No
42.86%

7
0
4
3

In your RN or NP career, have you been a mentor (see definition above)?
Yes
No

100.00%
0.00%

7
0

What type of mentorship relationship(s) have you experienced? (ALL that apply).
Formal, arranged by someone else

71.43%

5

Informal, established by mentor and/or mentee

42.86%

3

Within the same organization (mentor & mentee in
same organization)

85.71%

6

External to employer or school (mentor & mentee in
different organizations)

57.14%

4

0.00%

0

28.57%
71.43%

2
5

100.00%
0.00%

7
0

85.71%
14.29%
0.00%
0.00%

6
1
0
0

71.43%
28.57%

5
2

14.29%
85.71%

1
6

I have not had any mentoring relationships
Are you currently in a mentoring relationship with a novice NP?
Yes
No
Do you serve as a clinical preceptor for NP students?
Yes
No
If Yes, how many students per academic year?
1-2
3-4
5–6
More than 6
Do you have teaching experience?
Yes
No
Do you have teaching certifications?
Yes
No

MENTORING NURSE PRACTITIONERS
Appendix O
Table 9
CNE Evaluation Results

Nursing CNE Evaluation
Learner acquired knowledge about how to improve their mentoring relationships with novice
nurse practitioners.
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
5
1
0
0
0
6
4.83
Found this activity worthwhile for my professional practice.
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
4
2
0
0
0
6
4.67
This activity will enhance my knowledge and skill as a nurse practitioner.
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
3
3
0
0
0
6
4.5
Heather Healy was knowledgeable about the topic: Mutual Respect & Trust
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
5
1
0
0
0
6
4.83
Heather Healy was knowledgeable about the topic: Open Communication & Accessibility
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
5
1
0
0
0
6
4.83
Heather Healy was knowledgeable about the topic: Independence & Collaboration
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
5
1
0
0
0
6
4.83
Heather Healy was knowledgeable about the topic: Live Discussion Case Study Review
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
5
1
0
0
0
6
4.83
Heather Healy provided the information in an interesting manner that facilitated my learning
Strongly
Strongly
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Total
Weighted Average
Agree
Disagree
4
2
0
0
0
6
4.67
As a result of this activity, please share at least one action you will take to change your
professional practice/performance.
Increase in patience and listening when mentoring others.
Setting more achievable and motivational goals for a mentee
More goal-oriented, formalized mentor/mentee relationship planning in future.
Perhaps look for a mentor for myself asking objectively where do I need to grow. Leadership
I will strive to be a more active listener.
mentoring patients and co workers as well as students
Great tips and I love the resources provided.

56