Nurse-perceived quality of care in intensive care units and associations with work environment characteristics: a multicentre survey study.

AIMS: To examine nurse-perceived quality of care, controlling for overall job satisfaction among critical care nurses and to explore associations with work environment characteristics. BACKGROUND: Nurse-perceived quality of care and job satisfaction have been positively linked to quality outcomes for nurses and patients. Much evidence exists on factors contributing to job satisfaction. Understanding specific factors that affect nurse-perceived quality potentially enables for improvements of nursing care quality. DESIGN: A multicentre survey study was conducted in three Dutch intensive care units. METHODS: The Dutch version of the Essentials of Magnetism II questionnaire was used; including the single-item indicators: (i) nurse-perceived quality of care; (ii) overall job satisfaction; and (iii) 58 statements on work environments. Data were collected between October 2013 - June 2014. RESULTS: The majority of 123 responding nurses (response rate 45%) were more than satisfied with quality of care (55%) and with their job (66%). No associations were found with nurse characteristics, besides differences in job satisfaction between the units. After controlling for job satisfaction, nurse-perceived quality was positively associated with the work environment characteristics: adequacy of staffing, patient-centeredness, competent peers and support for education. Patient-centeredness and autonomy were the most important predictors for overall job satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Factors that contribute to nurse-perceived quality of care in intensive care units, independent from the effects of overall job satisfaction, were identified. Hereby, offering opportunities to maximize high quality of care to critically ill patients. Research in a larger sample is needed to confirm our findings.

Using Publicly Reported Nursing-Sensitive Screening Indicators to Measure Hospital Performance: The Netherlands Experience in 2011.

BACKGROUND: Deliberate screening allows detection of health risks that are otherwise not noticeable and allows expedient intervention to minimize complications and optimize outcomes, especially during critical events like hospitalization. Little research has evaluated the usefulness of screening performance and outcome indicators as measures to differentiate nursing quality, although policymakers are using them to benchmark hospitals. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to examine hospital performance based on nursing-sensitive screening indicators and to assess associations with hospital characteristics and nursing-sensitive outcomes for patients. METHODS: A secondary use of nursing-sensitive data from the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate was performed, including the mandatory screening and outcome indicators related to delirium, malnutrition, pain and pressure ulcers. The sample consisted of all 93 hospitals in the Netherlands in 2011. High- and low-performing hospitals were determined based on the overall proportion of screened patients. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance were used to examine screening performances in relation to hospital characteristics and nursing-sensitive outcomes. RESULTS: Over all hospitals, the average screening rates ranged from 59% (delirium) to 94% (pain). Organizational characteristics were not different in high- and low-performing hospitals. The hospitals with the best overall screening performances had significantly better results regarding protein intake within malnourished patients (p < .01). For mortality, marginal significant effects did not remain after controlling for organizational structures. No associations were found with prevalence of pressure ulcers and patient self-reported pain scores. DISCUSSION: The screening for patient risks is an important nursing task. Our findings suggest that nursing-sensitive screening indicators may be relevant measures for benchmarking nursing quality in hospitals. Time-trend studies are required to support our findings and to further investigate relations with nursing-sensitive outcomes.

Concordance between nurse-reported quality of care and quality of care as publicly reported by nurse-sensitive indicators.

BACKGROUND: Nurse-sensitive indicators and nurses' satisfaction with the quality of care are two commonly used ways to measure quality of nursing care. However, little is known about the relationship between these kinds of measures. This study aimed to examine concordance between nurse-sensitive screening indicators and nurse-perceived quality of care. METHODS: To calculate a composite performance score for each of six Dutch non-university teaching hospitals, the percentage scores of the publicly reported nurse-sensitive indicators: screening of delirium, screening of malnutrition, and pain assessments, were averaged (2011). Nurse-perceived quality ratings were obtained from staff nurses working in the same hospitals by the Dutch Essentials of Magnetism II survey (2010). Concordance between the quality measures was analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation. RESULTS: The mean screening performances ranged from 63% to 93% across the six hospitals. Nurse-perceived quality of care differed significantly between the hospitals, also after adjusting for nursing experience, educational level, and regularity of shifts. The hospitals with high-levels of nurse-perceived quality were also high-performing hospitals according to nurse-sensitive indicators. The relationship was true for high-performing as well as lower-performing hospitals, with strong correlations between the two quality measures (rS = 0.943, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that there is a significant positive association between objectively measured nurse-sensitive screening indicators and subjectively measured perception of quality. Moreover, the two indicators of quality of nursing care provide corresponding quality rankings. This implies that improving factors that are associated with nurses' perception of what they believe to be quality of care may also lead to better screening processes. Although convergent validity seems to be established, we emphasize that different kinds of quality measures could be used to complement each other, because various stakeholders may assign different values to the quality of nursing care.

Uniformity along the way: A scoping review on characteristics of nurse education programs worldwide.

BACKGROUND: The changing demands on healthcare require continuous development and education in the nursing profession. Homogeneity in nursing qualifications reduces educational inconsistencies between and within countries. However, despite various initiatives, modifying nurse education remains challenging because different countries have their own legislations, structures, motivations, and policies. OBJECTIVES: To summarize the characteristics of nurse education programs around the globe and analyze the similarities and differences between them. DESIGN AND METHODS: A scoping review was performed to identify different characteristics of nurse education programs in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Records published between January 2016 and July 2021 were searched in the PubMed, Cinahl, and ERIC databases. The reference lists of all included articles were also searched manually for relevant studies. Articles were eligible if they described nurse education in one or more of the selected countries with a focus on nursing degrees (both undergraduate and postgraduate programs), nursing titles, program duration, study load hours, or practice hours. Data were independently extracted using a predefined extraction sheet. We asked the respective nursing associations for confirmation and to provide any additional information. RESULTS: After searching 9769 records, 117 were included in the synthesis. The included records described characteristics of undergraduate nursing educational programs (n = 50), postgraduate programs (n = 30), or both (n = 37). In total, 86 undergraduate and 82 postgraduate programs were described, with a great variety in degrees, nursing titles, study load hours, and practice hours. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that there is still considerable variation in nurse education programs between countries. These diverse educational pathways lead to different nursing titles and internationally standardized definitions of nursing roles have not been established. This makes it difficult to understand the healthcare role of nurses. Hence, efforts are needed to increase the quality and uniformity of nurse education around the world.

How can we build and maintain the resilience of our health care professionals during COVID-19? Recommendations based on a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how to build and maintain the resilience of frontline healthcare professionals exposed to COVID-19 outbreak working conditions. DESIGN: Scoping review supplemented with expert interviews to validate the findings. SETTING: Hospitals. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, bioRxiv and medRxiv systematically and grey literature for articles focusing on the impact of COVID-19-like working conditions on the physical and/or mental health of healthcare professionals in a hospital setting. Articles using an empirical design about determinants or causes of physical and/or mental health and about interventions, measures and policies to preserve physical and/or mental health were included. Four experts were interviewed to reflect on the results from the scoping review. RESULTS: In total, 4471 records were screened leading to an inclusion of 73 articles. Recommendations prior to the outbreak fostering resilience included optimal provision of education and training, resilience training and interventions to create a feeling of being prepared. Recommendations during the outbreak consisted of (1) enhancing resilience by proper provision of information, psychosocial support and treatment (eg, create enabling conditions such as forming a psychosocial support team), monitoring the health status of professionals and using various forms and content of psychosocial support (eg, encouraging peer support, sharing and celebrating successes), (2) tasks and responsibilities, in which attention should be paid to kind of tasks, task mix and responsibilities as well as the intensity and weight of these tasks and (3) work patterns and working conditions. Findings of the review were validated by experts. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations were developed on how to build and maintain resilience of frontline healthcare professionals exposed to COVID-19 outbreak working conditions. These practical and easy to implement recommendations can be used by hospitals and other healthcare organisations to foster and preserve short-term and long-term physical and mental health and employability of their professionals.

Barriers and carriers: a multicenter survey of nurses' barriers and facilitators to monitoring of nurse-sensitive outcomes in intensive care units.

AIM: To identify nurses' barriers and facilitators to monitoring of nurse-sensitive outcomes in intensive care units (ICUs), and to explore influential nurse characteristics and work environment factors. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey in three Dutch ICUs between October 2013 - June 2014. METHODS: A questionnaire with questions regarding facilitators and three types of barriers: knowledge, attitude and behaviour. The Dutch Essentials of Magnetism II was used to examine work environments. RESULTS: All 126 responding nurses identified pressure ulcers and patient satisfaction as outcomes that are nurse-sensitive and nurses' full responsibility. Lack of time (behaviour) was perceived as the most prominent barrier, followed by unfamiliarity with mandatory indicators (knowledge), and unreliability of indicators as benchmark data (attitude). Education and clear policies were relevant facilitators. Of nurse characteristics, only regularity of shifts was related to perceived attitude related barriers. The work environment factor "clinical autonomy" was potentially associated with behaviour related barriers.

Associations between characteristics of the nurse work environment and five nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in hospitals: a systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on relationships between characteristics of the nurse work environment and five nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in hospitals. DATA SOURCES: The search was performed in Medline (PubMed), Cochrane, Embase, and CINAHL. REVIEW METHODS: Included were quantitative studies published from 2004 to 2012 that examined associations between work environment and the following patient outcomes: delirium, malnutrition, pain, patient falls and pressure ulcers. The Dutch version of Cochrane's critical appraisal instrument was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. RESULTS: Of the initial 1120 studies, 29 were included in the review. Nurse staffing was inversely related to patient falls; more favorable staffing hours were associated with fewer fall incidents. Mixed results were shown for nurse staffing in relation to pressure ulcers. Characteristics of work environment other than nurse staffing that showed significant effects were: (i) collaborative relationships; positively perceived communication between nurses and physicians was associated with fewer patient falls and lower rates of pressure ulcers, (ii) nurse education; higher levels of education were related to fewer patient falls and (iii) nursing experience; lower levels of experience were related to more patient falls and higher rates of pressure ulcers. No eligible studies were found regarding delirium and malnutrition, and only one study found that favorable staffing was related to better pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that there is evidence on associations between work environment and nurse-sensitive patient outcomes. However, the results are equivocal and studies often do not provide clear conclusions. A quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible due to methodological issues in the primary studies (for example, poorly described samples). The diversity in outcome measures and the majority of cross-sectional designs make quantitative analysis even more difficult. In the future, well-described research designs of a longitudinal character will be needed in this field of work environment and nursing quality.