The Nursing Activities Score Per Nurse Ratio Is Associated With In-Hospital Mortality, Whereas the Patients Per Nurse Ratio Is Not.

OBJECTIVES: Studies have shown contradicting results on the association of nursing workload and mortality. Most of these studies expressed workload as patients per nurse ratios; however, this does not take into account that some patients require more nursing time than others. Nursing time can be quantified by tools like the Nursing Activities Score. We investigated the association of the Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio, respectively, the patients per nurse ratio with in-hospital mortality in ICUs. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of the National Intensive Care Evaluation database. SETTING: Fifteen Dutch ICUs. PATIENTS: All ICU patients admitted to and registered ICU nurses working at 15 Dutch ICUs between January 1, 2016, and January 1, 2018, were included. The association of mean or day 1 patients per nurse ratio and Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio with in-hospital mortality was analyzed using logistic regression models. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio greater than 41 for both mean Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio as well as Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio on day 1 were associated with a higher in-hospital mortality (odds ratios, 1.19 and 1.17, respectively). After case-mix adjustment the association between a Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio greater than 61 for both mean Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio as well as Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio on day 1 and in-hospital mortality remained significant (odds ratios, 1.29 and 1.26, respectively). Patients per nurse ratio was not associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A higher Nursing Activities Score per nurse ratio was associated with higher in-hospital mortality. In contrast, no association was found between patients per nurse ratios and in-hospital mortality in The Netherlands. Therefore, we conclude that it is more important to focus on the nursing workload that the patients generate rather than on the number of patients the nurse has to take care of in the ICU.

Nurse Operation Workload (NOW), a new nursing workload model for intensive care units based on time measurements: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Several instruments have been developed to measure nursing workload. The commonly used Nursing Activities Score (NAS) and Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) are applied to all types of ICU patients. Former research showed that NAS explained 59 to 81% of actual nursing time, whereas the Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) described only 43% of the actual nursing time. In both models the development was not based on time measurements. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop a time-based model which can assess patient related nursing workload more accurately and to evaluate whether patient characteristics influence nursing time and therefore should be included in the model. DESIGN: Observational study design. SETTING: All 82 Dutch ICUs participate in the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) quality registry. Fifteen of these ICUs are participating in the newly implemented voluntary nursing capacity module. Seven of these ICUs voluntarily participated in this study. PARTICIPANTS: The patient(s) that were under the responsibility of a chosen nurse were followed by the observer during the entire shift. METHODS: Time spent per nursing activity per patient was measured in different shifts in seven Dutch ICUs. Nursing activities were measured using an in-house developed web application. Three different models of varying complexity (1. nursing activities only; 2. nursing activities and case-mix correction; 3. complex model with case-mix correction per nursing activity) were developed to explain the total amount of nursing time per patient. The performance of the three models was assessed in 1000 bootstrap samples using the squared Pearson correlation coefficient (R2), Root Mean Squared Prediction Error (RMSPE), Mean Absolute Prediction Error (MAPE), and prediction bias. RESULTS: In total 287 unique patients have been observed in 371 shifts. Model one's Pearson's R was 0.89 (95%CI 0.86-0.92), model two with case-mix correction 0.90 (95%CI 0.88-0.93), and the third complex model 0.64 (95%CI 0.56-0.72) compared with the actual patient related nursing workload. CONCLUSION: The newly developed Nurse Operation Workload (NOW) model outperforms existing models in measuring nursing workload, while it includes a lower number of activities and therewith lowers the registration burden. Case-mix correction does not further improve the performance of this model. The patient related nursing workload measured by the NOW gives insight in the actual nursing time needed by patients and can therefore be used to evaluate the average workload per patient per nurse.

Workload scoring systems in the Intensive Care and their ability to quantify the need for nursing time: A systematic literature review.

INTRODUCTION: The Intensive Care Unit is a resource intense service with a high nursing workload per patient resulting in a low ratio of patients per nurse. This review aims to identify existing scoring systems for measuring nursing workload on the Intensive Care and assess their validity and reliability to quantify the needed nursing time. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature indexed before 01/Mar/2018 in the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Cinahl. Full-text articles were selected and data on systems measuring nursing workload on the Intensive Care and translation of this workload into the amount of nursing time needed was extracted. RESULTS: We included 71 articles identifying 34 different scoring systems of which 27 were included for further analysis as these described a translation of workload into nursing time needed. Almost all systems were developed with nurses. The validity of most scoring systems was evaluated by comparing them with another system (59%) or by using time measurements (26%). The most common way to translate workload-scores into nursing time needed was by categorizing the Nurse:Patient-ratios. Validation of the Nurse:Patient-ratios was mostly evaluated by comparing the results with other systems or with the actual planning and not with objective time measurements. CONCLUSION: Despite the large attention given to nursing workload systems for Intensive Care, only a few systems objectively evaluated the validity and reliability of measuring nursing workload with moderate results. The Nursing Activity Score system performed best. Poor methodology for the translation of workload scores into Nurse:Patient-ratio weakens the value of nursing workload scoring systems in daily Intensive Care practice.