Do Jointly Appointed Nursing and Midwifery Clinical Academics Provide Benefits to Patients, Individual Joint Appointees, Academic Institutions and Health and Social Care Organisations? A Scoping Literature Review

Abstract

Aim: This review aimed to assess the evidence of benefit from Nurses and Midwives' Clinical Academic (NMCA) appointments and establish the value of their contribution to the key stakeholders: patients, the individual joint appointees, academic institutions and health and social care organisations. Background: Jointly appointed clinical academic posts for nurses and midwives are rare, making up less than 0.1% of the workforce in the UK. Design: A scoping review. Methods: Conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Methodology for Scoping Reviews. Data Sources: ProQuest, SCOPUS, MEDLINE Ovid, CINAHL Ultimate and British Library EThOS were searched for English-language publications from January 2013 to December 2023. Results: Thirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Key themes were the introduction of effective care guidelines and interventions, shared decision-making in care and research, individual professional growth and development, motivation and job satisfaction, improved clinical–academic partnerships and research advancement. Conclusion: There is emerging evidence of significant benefits from clinical academic posts in nursing and midwifery; studies have generally been qualitative, focusing less on quantitative approaches. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: This study demonstrates potential benefits to both the nursing/midwifery profession and patients, particularly regarding the generation of new knowledge and provision of quality care.