RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A high level of competence among staff is necessary for providing patient-safe surgical care. Knowledge regarding what factors contribute to the professional development of specialist nurses in surgical care and why they choose to remain in the workplace despite high work requirements is needed. To investigate and describe the organizational and social work environment of specialist nurses in surgical care as part of studying factors that impact on professional development. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional study with a strategic convenience sampling procedure that recruited 73 specialist nurses in surgical care in Sweden between October to December 2021. The study was guided by STROBE Statement and checklist of cross-sectional studies. The validated Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire was used, and additional demographic data. Descriptive statistics were performed and the comparison to the population benchmarks was presented as the mean with a 95% confidence interval. To study potential differences among the demographic and professional characteristics, pairwise t tests were used with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: Five domains were identified as factors related to success, as they received higher scores in relation to population benchmarks: quality of leadership, variation of work, meaning of work and work engagement as well as job insecurity. There was also a significant association between a having a manager with low nursing education and job insecurity (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Quality of leadership is important for the professional development of specialist nurses in surgical care. Strategic work seems to include managers with a higher nursing education level to prevent insecure professional working conditions.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) represent an integral component of modern cancer care and have increasingly been implemented to ensure accurate and evidence-based treatment recommendations. During MDTMs, multiple and complex medical and patient-related information should be considered by a multi-professional team whose members contribute various perspectives. Registered nurses (RNs) are expected to share information on the patient perspective at MDTMs. However, research suggests that RNs' contributions to case discussions are limited and that patient perspective is generally underrepresented. Our aim was to explore RNs' views of the prerequisites for and barriers to the inclusion of the patient perspective in MDTMs in Swedish cancer care. METHODS: Data were collected from four focus group interviews with 22 RNs who worked as contact nurses in Swedish cancer care. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: The analysis identified two categories and five subcategories. The participants presented different views and expressed ambivalence about the patient perspective in MDTMs. Subcategories were related to medical versus holistic perspectives, the added value of patient perspective, and possibilities for patient contributions. The participants also discussed prerequisites for the patient perspective to be considered in MDTM decision-making process, with subcategories related to structures promoting attention to the patient perspective and determinants of RNs' contributions to case discussions in MDTMs. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates various views related to the patient perspective in MDTMs and identifies a great need to clarify the RN's role. Our results indicate that if enhanced presentation of the patient perspective in MDTMs is desired, key information points and structures must be established to collect and present relevant patient-related information.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are an integral component of cancer care. Increasingly, virtual MDTMs are used to grant high-quality treatment recommendations across health-care regions, which expands and develops the local MDTM team to a regional or national expert network. We investigated health professionals' experiences from national, virtual MDTMs for rare cancer with a focus on key enabling factors and barriers. METHODS: Health professionals who participate in seven national, virtual MDTMs in Swedish health-care responded to a questionnaire exploring key enabling factors, barriers and opportunities for MDTM development. Conventional content analysis was used to identify thematic categories based on free-text responses. RESULTS: Participants´ perspectives could be assigned into three categories ie, a national arena with potential for comprehensive knowledge and collaboration, prerequisites for decision-making and organization and responsibilities. These categories consisted of nine sub-categories that referred to, eg, collective competence, resources, clinical research, case discussion, meeting climate, patient-related information, MDTMs potential, referral and technical insufficiencies. CONCLUSION: National, virtual MDTMs represent a new multidisciplinary collaborative arena that introduces benefits as well as challenges. Consideration of key enabling factors and barriers may ease implementation and further optimize MDTMs in cancer care.