Nurses' experience with presenteeism and the potential consequences on patient safety: a qualitative study among nurses at out-of-hours emergency primary care facilities.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to gain new insight and knowledge on out-of-hours emergency primary care nurses' experience of presenteeism in their workplace and their outlook on the impact they recognised the phenomenon to have on patient safety when caring for acute patients. DESIGN: An explorative qualitative study. SETTING: The study was conducted at three out-of-hours primary care facilities in southwest Norway. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 10 female nurses were recruited as interviewees. Nurses providing direct patient care were included in the study. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in four major themes: strong work ethics influence the decision to attend work unwell; work environment factors have a negative impact on nurses' health; nurses' awareness of consequences on the quality of care and patient safety and nurses make use of coping strategies when engaging in presenteeism. CONCLUSION: Presenteeism is a common experience among nurses at out-of-hours emergency primary care clinics, with work-related stress being a significant contributing factor. Despite recognising a decrease in performance while engaging in presenteeism, nurses displayed adaptive behaviour. They were confident that their suboptimal health issues did not significantly impact patient safety while caring for acute patients. However, the true impact of presenteeism on patient safety in an out-of-hours emergency care setting remains uncertain due to the reliance on subjective reporting systems as quality indicators. More research is needed to understand the phenomenon and its implications on patient safety fully.

Resilience perspective on healthcare professionals' adaptations to changes and challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic: a meta-synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, review and synthesise qualitative literature on healthcare professionals' adaptations to changes and challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-synthesis. DATA SOURCES: Academic Search Elite, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Direct and Scopus. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Qualitative or mixed-methods studies published between 2019 and 2021 investigating healthcare professionals' adaptations to changes and challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using a predesigned data extraction form that included details about publication (eg, authors, setting, participants, adaptations and outcomes). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were included. A range of adaptations crucial to maintaining healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic were found, including taking on new roles, conducting self and peer education and reorganising workspaces. Triggers for adaptations included unclear workflows, lack of guidelines, increased workload and transition to digital solutions. As challenges arose, many health professionals reported increased collaboration across wards, healthcare teams, hierarchies and healthcare services. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals demonstrated significant adaptive capacity when faced with challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Several adaptations were identified as beneficial for future organisational healthcare service changes, while others exposed weaknesses in healthcare system designs and capacity, leading to dysfunctional adaptations. Healthcare professionals' experiences working during the COVID-19 pandemic present a unique opportunity to learn how healthcare systems rapidly respond to changes, and how resilient healthcare services can be built globally.

Hospital physicians' views on discharge and readmission processes: a qualitative study from Norway.

OBJECTIVES: To explore hospital physicians' views on readmission and discharge processes in the interface between hospitals and municipalities. DESIGN: Qualitative case study. SETTING: The Norwegian healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen hospital physicians (residents and consultants) from one hospital, involved in the treatment and discharge of patients. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that patients were being discharged earlier, with more complex medical conditions, than they had been previously, and that discharges sometimes were perceived as premature. Insufficient capacity at the hospital resulted in pressure to discharge patients, but the primary healthcare service of the area was not always able to assume care of these patients. Communication between levels of the healthcare service was limited. The hospital stay summary was the most important, and sometimes only, form of communication between levels. The discharge process was described as complicated and was affected by healthcare personnel, by patients themselves and by aspects of the primary healthcare service. Early hospital discharges, poor communication between healthcare services and inadequacies in the discharge process were perceived to affect hospital readmissions. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide a better understanding of hospital physicians' views on the discharge and hospital readmission processes in the interface between the hospital and the primary healthcare service. The study also identifies discrepancies in governmental requirements, reform regulations and current practices in municipalities and hospitals.