Decision fatigue among clinical nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to report the psychometric properties, including validity and reliability, of the decision fatigue scale (DFS). BACKGROUND: Decision fatigue may impair nurses' ability to make sound clinical decisions and negatively impact patient care. Given the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological well-being and the workplace environment, decision fatigue may be even more apparent among clinical nurses. Valid assessment of this condition among clinical nurses may inform supportive interventions to mitigate the negative sequelae associated with states of decision fatigue. DESIGN: This study was a secondary analysis of a parent study using a cross-sectional descriptive design. METHODS: A convenience sample of 160 staff nurses was recruited online from across the United States. Participants completed a demographic questionnaire and subjective measures of decision fatigue, nursing practice environment scale and traumatic stress. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), correlation coefficients and internal consistency reliability coefficients were computed to examine the DFS's validity and reliability within this sample. RESULTS: The EFA yielded a single factor, 9-item version of the DFS. The DFS scores were strongly correlated with traumatic stress and moderately correlated with the nursing practice environment, and the scale displayed appropriate internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first known study to provide evidence of the DFS's validity and reliability in a sample of registered nurses working during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study provide evidence of a reliable and valid assessment instrument for decision fatigue that can be used to measure the burden of decision-making among registered nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Given the relationship between traumatic stress and the nursing work environment, decision fatigue may be a modifiable target for interventions that can enhance the quality of decision-making among clinical nurses.

A psychometric evaluation of the Family Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale among surrogate decision-makers of the critically ill.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to report the psychometric properties, in terms of validity and reliability, of the Unconscious Version of the Family Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale (FDMSE). METHODS: A convenience sample of 215 surrogate decision-makers for critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation was recruited from four intensive care units at a tertiary hospital. Cross-sectional data were collected from participants between days 3 and 7 of a decisionally impaired patient's exposure to acute mechanical ventilation. Participants completed a self-report demographic form and subjective measures of family decision-making self-efficacy, preparation for decision-making, and decisional fatigue. Exploratory factor analyses, correlation coefficients, and internal consistency reliability estimates were computed to evaluate the FDMSE's validity and reliability in surrogate decision-makers of critically ill patients. RESULTS: The exploratory factor analyses revealed a two-factor, 11-item version of the FDMSE was the most parsimonious in this sample. Furthermore, modified 11-item FDMSE demonstrated discriminant validity with the measures of fatigue and preparation for decision-making and demonstrated acceptable internal consistency reliability estimates. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This is the first known study to provide evidence for a two-factor structure for a modified, 11-item FDMSE. These dimensions represent treatment and palliation-related domains of family decision-making self-efficacy. The modified FDMSE is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used to measure family decision-making self-efficacy among surrogate decision-makers of the critically ill.

A preliminary psychometric evaluation of the eight-item cognitive load scale.

AIM: The aim of this article is to report the psychometric properties of the eight-item cognitive load scale. BACKGROUND: According to cognitive load theory, the formatting and delivery of healthcare education influences the degree to which patients and/or family members can engage their working memory systems for learning. However, despite its relevance, cognitive load has not yet been evaluated among surrogate decision makers exposed to electronic decision support for healthcare decisions. To date, no psychometric analyses of instruments evaluating cognitive load have been reported within healthcare settings. METHODS: A convenience sample of 62 surrogate decision makers for critically ill patients were exposed to one of two healthcare decision support interventions were recruited from four intensive care units at a tertiary medical center in Northeast Ohio. Participants were administered a battery of psychosocial instruments and the eight-item cognitive load scale (CLS). RESULTS: The CLS demonstrated a bidimensional factor structure with acceptable discriminant validity and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.75 and 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The CLS is a psychometrically sound instrument that may be used in the evaluation of decision support among surrogate decision makers of the critically ill. The authors recommend application of the cognitive load scale in the evaluation and development of healthcare education and interventions.

Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Veterans Affairs Whole Health Integration Using the Updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented the Veteran-centered Whole Health System initiative across VA sites with approaches to implementation varying by site. PURPOSE: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we aimed to synthesize systemic barriers and facilitators to Veteran use with the initiative. Relevance to healthcare quality, systematic comparison of implementation procedures across a national healthcare system provides a comprehensive portrait of strengths and opportunities for improvement. METHODS: Advanced fellows from 11 VA Quality Scholars sites performed the initial data collection, and the final report includes CFIR-organized results from six sites. RESULTS: Key innovation findings included cost, complexity, offerings, and accessibility. Inner setting barriers and facilitators included relational connections and communication, compatibility, structure and resources, learning centeredness, and information and knowledge access. Finally, results regarding individuals included innovation deliverers, implementation leaders and team, and individual capability, opportunity, and motivation to implement and deliver whole health care. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Examination of barriers and facilitators suggest that Whole Health coaches are key components of implementation and help to facilitate communication, relationship building, and knowledge access for Veterans and VA employees. Continuous evaluation and improvement of implementation procedures at each site is also recommended.

Nonspecific Complaints in Older Emergency Department Patients.

Nonspecific complaints such as generalized weakness and fatigue are common in older adults presenting to an emergency department. These complaints may be caused by acute or chronic medical problems, or they may be exacerbated or caused by socioeconomic risks factors. Acute causes may be related to serious medical conditions requiring prompt treatment. A thorough history and physical examination in conjunction with an interdisciplinary approach allows emergency departments to identify acute conditions as well as geriatric syndromes and unmet home needs, such as food insecurity and caregiver burden. A whole-health system approach should be used for safe transitions of care.