Learning from a crisis: a qualitative study on how nurses reshaped their work environment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The global nursing shortages exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a drastic reorganization in nursing practices. Work routines, the composition of teams and subsequently mundane nursing practices were all altered to sustain the accessibility and quality of care. These dramatic changes demanded a reshaping of the nurses' work environment. The aim of this study was to explore how nurses reshaped their work environment in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A descriptive study comprising 26 semi-structured interviews conducted in a large Dutch teaching hospital between June and September 2020. Participants were nurses (including intensive care unit nurses), outpatient clinic assistants, nurse managers, and management (including one member of the Nurse Practice Council). The interviews were analysed with open, axial, and selective coding. RESULTS: We identified five themes: 1) the Nursing Staff Deployment Plan created new micro-teams with complementary roles to meet the care needs of COVID-19 infected patients; 2) nurse-led adaptations effectively managed the increased workload, thereby ensuring the quality of care; 3) continuous professional development ensured adequate competence levels for all roles; 4) interprofessional collaboration resulted in experienced solidarity, a positive atmosphere, and increased autonomy for nurses; and, 5) supportive managers reduced nurses' stress and improved work conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that nurses positively reshaped their work environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. They contributed to innovative solutions in an environment of equal interprofessional collaboration, which led to greater respect for their knowledge and competencies, enhanced their autonomy and improved management support.

Not one, but many: developing a multi-indication pricing model for medicines in Belgium.

Back ground: Current pricing and reimbursement models that focus on one indication at a time are not suited to address the market access of multi-indication medicines. Therefore, the aim of this study is to co-create with Belgian stakeholders a multi-indication pricing model and procedural pathway, to identify conditions for implementation, and to illustrate the multi-indication pricing model with a case study. Methods: Different multi-indication pricing models were identified from the literature, case studies and pilots in other countries. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 representatives from the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance, insurance funds, clinicians, patients, the policy cell of the Minister of Health, pharmaceutical industry and academia. These provided insight in the opinions of stakeholders about possible multi-indication pricing models and their feasibility in the Belgian context. Agreement on the preferred multi-indication pricing model and procedural pathway was reached in a multi-stakeholder round table. Results: The international review generated four main multi-indication pricing models that vary in terms of whether a uniform price or differential prices are applied, whether prices are adjusted for the volume and/or value of the medicine in each indication, and whether a proactive or retroactive dynamic pricing approach is used. However, Belgian stakeholders preferred a fifth model, which sets a single price as the volume- and value-weighted average price across all indications at launch. Over time, the price is adapted based on volume and value of the medicine in real-life practice for each indication. To implement this model, a legal framework, horizon scanning and early dialogue, data infrastructure, an evidence plan for the medicine, technical expertise and governance model need to be developed. Conclusion: Although the multi-indication pricing model preferred by Belgian stakeholders raises the administrative burden, it allows for the price of a medicine to vary during the lifecycle based on its initial and real-life performance in multiple indications.

Understanding rebel nurse leadership-as-practice: Challenging and changing the status quo in hospitals.

Some nurses are responding rebelliously to the changing healthcare landscape by challenging the status quo and deviating from suboptimal practices, professional norms, and organizational rules. While some view rebel nurse leadership as challenging traditional structures to improve patient care, others see it as disruptive and harmful. These diverging opinions create dilemmas for nurses and nurse managers in daily practice. To understand the context, dilemmas, and interactions in rebel nurse leadership, we conducted a multiple case study in two Dutch hospitals. We delved into the mundane practices to expand the concept of leadership-as-practice. By shadowing rebel nurse practices, we identified three typical leadership practices which present the most common "lived" experiences and dilemmas of nurses and nurse managers. Overall, we noticed that deviating acts were more often quick fixes rather than sustainable changes. Our research points to what is needed to change the status quo in a sustainable manner. To change unworkable practices, nurses need to share their experienced dilemmas with their managers. In addition, nurse managers must build relationships with other nurses, value different perspectives, and support experimenting to promote collective learning.

Beyond transformational leadership in nursing: A qualitative study on rebel nurse leadership-as-practice.

Most nurse leadership studies have concentrated on a classical, heroic, and hierarchical view of leadership. However, critical leadership studies have argued the need for more insight into leadership in daily nursing practices. Nurses must align their professional standards and opinions on quality of care with those of other professionals, management, and patients. They want to achieve better outcomes for their patients but also feel disciplined and controlled. To deal with this, nurses challenge the status quo by showing rebel nurse leadership. In this paper, we describe 47 nurses' experiences with rebel nurse leadership from a leadership-as-practice perspective. In eight focus groups, nurses from two hospitals and one long-term care organization shared their experiences of rebel nurse leadership practices. They illustrated the differences between "bad" and "good" rebels. Knowledge, work experience, and patient-driven motivation were considered necessary for "good" rebel leadership. The participants also explained that continuous social influencing is important while exploring and challenging the boundaries set by colleagues and management. Credibility, trust, autonomy, freedom, and preserving relationships determined whether rebel nurses acted visibly or invisibly. Ultimately, this study refines the concept of rebel nurse leadership, gives a better understanding of how this occurs in nursing practice, and give insights into the challenges faced when studying nursing leadership practices.

A scoping review of rebel nurse leadership: Descriptions, competences and stimulating/hindering factors.

AIMS: To (1) give an overview of rebel nurse leadership by summarising descriptions of positive deviance, tempered radicals and healthcare rebels; (2) examine the competences of nurse rebel leadership; and (3) describe factors that stimulate or hinder the development of rebel nurse leadership. BACKGROUND: Research shows nurses have lower intention to leave their jobs when they can control their work practices, show leadership and provide the best care. However, organisational rules and regulations do not always fit the provision of good care, which challenges nurses to show leadership and deviate from the rules and regulations to benefit the patient. Three concepts describe this practice: positive deviance, healthcare rebels and tempered radicals. DESIGN: Scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR checklist. METHODS: Papers describing positive deviance, healthcare rebels and tempered radicals in nursing were identified by searching Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed and PsycINFO. After data extraction, these three concepts were analysed to study the content of descriptions and definitions, competences and stimulating and hindering factors. RESULTS: Of 2705 identified papers, 25 were included. The concept descriptions yielded three aspects: (1) positive deviance approach, (2) unconventional and non-confirmative behaviour and (3) relevance of networks and relationships. The competences were the ability to: (1) collaborate in/outside the organisation, (2) gain and share expert (evidence-based) knowledge, (3) critically reflect on working habits/problems in daily care and dare to challenge the status quo and (4) generate ideas to improve care. The factors that stimulate or hinder the development of rebel nurse leadership are as follows: (1) dialogue and reflection, (2) networking conditions and (3) the managers' role. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our analysis, we summarise the descriptions given of rebel nurse leadership, the mentioned competences and provide an overview of the factors that stimulate or hinder rebel nurse leadership. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The descriptions produced in this review of rebel nurse leadership and the stimulating or hindering factors listed should help nurses and managers encourage rebel leadership.