The review of the evidence has shown that the contribution of nursing can be difficult to measure and consequently support nurse staffing ratios. However, there is a growing body of evidence which associates higher number of registered nursing staff to patient ratio relates to improved safety and better outcomes for patients. The challenge for nurses is to produce accurate and meaningful outcome measures for nursing and collect data that accurately reflect the input of nursing on patient outcomes and safety.

In the years following the abolition of the English National Board for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting in 2002, concerns were raised within the Critical Care nursing community about a lack of consistency in post-registration education programmes. In response to this, the Critical Care Network National Nurse Leads (CC3N) formed a subgroup, the Critical Care Nurse Education Review Forum (CCNERF) to address these concerns. A review of UK course provision confirmed marked inconsistency in the length, content and associated academic award. The CCNERF commenced a two-phase project, first developing national standards for critical care nurse education such as length of course and academic credit level, followed by the development of a national competency framework. Following significant review and revision, version two of the National Competency Framework for Registered Nurses in Adult Critical Care was published by CC3N in 2015. This paper introduces the National Competency Framework and provides an overview of its background, development and implementation. It then considers the future direction of UK post-registration Critical Care nurse education.

The theatre-for-development literature does not yet clearly articulate how specific theatre forms may be more or less efficacious in terms of influencing health-related behaviour across cultural contexts. More extensive research into this question will yield significant benefits in terms of focusing practice culturally.

No abstract

For us s i rig a p rog ra in (1 rou ri rl p r o bl c nr -sol I' rig rri rt ti o r l o 10g.y THE INCREASING MAGNITUDE of complex environmental problems that face man a s he attempts to maintain the quality of his environment becomes more apparent each day. It is vital, therefore, that consideration be given to the effectiveness of our academic institutions in providing students with an education necessary to solve such problems.With few exceptions, universities have failed to realize &hat these problems will demand a new educational philosophy if they a r e to make a significant contribution. The nature and importance of this philosophy and the establishment of a new Master's degree in Enviornmental Science at Miami University embodythe essence of this paper. MULTIDLSCIPLINARY VERSUS INTERDISCIPLINARY PHILOSOPHYWhen one carefully scrutinizes problem areas such as pollution abatement and resource management, one recognizes that they a r e interdisciplinary in nature. No one discipline i s able to deal effectively with such problems, especially when their full scale i s understood. To gain this understanding, it i s imperatice to realize the philosophical difference between multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary programs.In the past, individuals from several disciplines have banded together to form multidisciplinary teams to work on large-scale problems. This w a s particularly true when monies were appropriated by afunding agency with application emphasis placed on the solving of a particular problem. Similarly, funding agencies in the past have supplied a monetary catalyst for the formation of "paper institutes" in many academic institutions to deal with complex problems in a fragmentary manner. The structure and function of such paper institutes a r e well documented in the Steinhart Report ( 3 ) .Those utilizing the multidisciplinary approach a r e faced with difficulties similar to those faced by the builders of the Biblical Tower of Babel. Each speaks about the problem in the dialect of his own discipline with little comprehension of the problem a s a whole. In the future, each member of the team must be more aware of his role as a component of a unified effort. Each member of the team must not only be competent in his own specialized area, but must also understand the vocabulary, methods, and objectives of those with whom he is working. Thus, the approach must be inter-(mutual) and not multi-(many) in purpose and structure. This philosophical approach will eliminate much duplication of effort; however, it does necessitate coordination among the team members.