LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Financing a Perioperative Nursing Education Course I wish to comment on the article “Nursing Shortages in the OR: Solutions for New Models of Education” (January 2015, Vol 101, No 1). While I appreciate the authors’ detailed description of their course, I feel there were important issues omitted from the article. As someone who has participated in exploring partnerships between academia and practice institutions, I have firsthand knowledge of how arduous the process can sometimes be. In particular, the costs and overall budget associated with this type of project can either support or derail the outcome. Budget areas for this project include costs for having faculty members design and teach the course, books and other materials, utilization of facility staff, student tuition, and other miscellaneous items. Specific to this project, how were the costs covered related to the Periop 101TM training modules, university faculty salaries for teaching the course, and marketing strategies? In addition, did the authors seek and receive any funding to assist with the costs of the program? Providing this information may assist others in designing and implementing similar programs, which could help to alleviate the negative consequences of the perioperative nursing shortage.
Robin Chard, PhD, RN, CNOR Associate Professor College of Nursing Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, FL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2015.04.003
Author response Thank you for your interest and comments on our article. We agree that exploring partnerships between academia and practice institutions would not be complete without a note about the financial impact and fiscal responsibilities. On the university side, the students were responsible for the cost of the eight Periop 101 modules. A lump sum was paid to AORN for the modules by the university, and then each student was responsible for paying his or her portion to the university. Because this course was initially conducted during J-term (ie, an intensive three-week term) in January 2013, the university did not charge students for tuition if they were registered for both the fall and spring terms. Since then, the university has begun to charge a nominal fee per credit hour
for tuition for a J-term course. The university’s faculty member was paid as part of her salary because this was counted as part of her annual teaching load. No funding was received to offset the costs of the program. The facility incremental costs related to the course must be considered too. Identifying and separating out the facility educators’ wages is difficult because one would need to identify what tasks were left undone or resulted in the educator working overtime during the planning and implementation periods of this course. Leaders from each facility who are exempt (ie, salaried) staff are considered to be “cost neutral.” As for the cost of the facility classrooms and simulation labs, these areas were scheduled during low-use times. The surgical supplies used during the simulation experiences (eg, gowns, gloves, sponges, masks, hoods, prep kits) were gathered from open, unused products that would have been discarded. Vendors even donated their time, products, and equipment to help with this perioperative course. The surgical instruments that were used for demonstration and practice were processed with clean, repurposed wraps to simulate sterile devices. The issue of costs is definitely important when establishing a program budget; however, the incremental costs were negligible compared with the benefits that were obtained from this program. We worked to be good stewards by providing a lowcost program with a high probability of repetition and sustainability. We appreciate the opportunity to address this inquiry and commentary as we work collectively on processes to address the perioperative nursing shortage.
Kay Ball, PhD, RN, CNOR, FAAN Associate Professor of Nursing Otterbein University Westerville, OH
Donna Doyle, MS, RN, CNOR, NE-BC Administrative Director of Surgery and Anesthesia Grant Medical Center Columbus, OH http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2015.04.002
Editor’s note: Periop 101: A Core Curriculum is a trademark of AORN, Inc, Denver, CO. ª AORN, Inc, 2015
602 j AORN Journal
www.aornjournal.org
Robin Chard, PhD, RN, CNOR Associate Professor College of Nursing Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, FL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2015.04.003
Author response Thank you for your interest and comments on our article. We agree that exploring partnerships between academia and practice institutions would not be complete without a note about the financial impact and fiscal responsibilities. On the university side, the students were responsible for the cost of the eight Periop 101 modules. A lump sum was paid to AORN for the modules by the university, and then each student was responsible for paying his or her portion to the university. Because this course was initially conducted during J-term (ie, an intensive three-week term) in January 2013, the university did not charge students for tuition if they were registered for both the fall and spring terms. Since then, the university has begun to charge a nominal fee per credit hour
for tuition for a J-term course. The university’s faculty member was paid as part of her salary because this was counted as part of her annual teaching load. No funding was received to offset the costs of the program. The facility incremental costs related to the course must be considered too. Identifying and separating out the facility educators’ wages is difficult because one would need to identify what tasks were left undone or resulted in the educator working overtime during the planning and implementation periods of this course. Leaders from each facility who are exempt (ie, salaried) staff are considered to be “cost neutral.” As for the cost of the facility classrooms and simulation labs, these areas were scheduled during low-use times. The surgical supplies used during the simulation experiences (eg, gowns, gloves, sponges, masks, hoods, prep kits) were gathered from open, unused products that would have been discarded. Vendors even donated their time, products, and equipment to help with this perioperative course. The surgical instruments that were used for demonstration and practice were processed with clean, repurposed wraps to simulate sterile devices. The issue of costs is definitely important when establishing a program budget; however, the incremental costs were negligible compared with the benefits that were obtained from this program. We worked to be good stewards by providing a lowcost program with a high probability of repetition and sustainability. We appreciate the opportunity to address this inquiry and commentary as we work collectively on processes to address the perioperative nursing shortage.
Kay Ball, PhD, RN, CNOR, FAAN Associate Professor of Nursing Otterbein University Westerville, OH
Donna Doyle, MS, RN, CNOR, NE-BC Administrative Director of Surgery and Anesthesia Grant Medical Center Columbus, OH http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2015.04.002
Editor’s note: Periop 101: A Core Curriculum is a trademark of AORN, Inc, Denver, CO. ª AORN, Inc, 2015
602 j AORN Journal
www.aornjournal.org
