Nurse Managers' Professional Quality of Life During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Health systems cannot effectively support nurse managers without understanding psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the professional quality of life of frontline nursing management during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey of 54 nurses in management positions at a large Midwest academic medical center during 2022 was conducted. Participants completed an electronic survey including demographics, Professional Quality of Life Measure Version 5, and items assessing past consideration of and future intent to leave their position, organization, or profession. RESULTS: Most participants had previously considered changing roles (80%) or leaving the organization during the pandemic (76%). Fewer respondents reported that changing role (24%) or organization (20%) was likely during the upcoming 6-12 months. Most participants scored in moderate ranges of Compassion Satisfaction, Burnout, and Secondary Traumatic Stress scales (85%, 89%, and 74%, respectively). Higher Compassion Satisfaction was associated with extreme unlikelihood of leaving for an internal non-management role. Higher Burnout scores were associated with more time working and past consideration or future likelihood of leaving for an external non-nursing position. Secondary Traumatic Stress scores were higher for nurse managers and house operation managers than assistant nurse managers and associated with past consideration of moving to an internal non-management role or external non-nursing position and future likelihood of moving to an external non-nursing position. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse management occupies a demanding position between frontline staff needs and administrative requirements, profoundly impacted by COVID-19. Health care researchers, administration, and policymakers must learn how to support, retain, and sustain nursing management in a post-pandemic world.

Work Engagement among Acute Care Nurses: A Qualitative Study.

Aims: To understand how Omani nurses conceptualize work engagement, explore factors influencing engagement, and identify strategies to improve work engagement. Design: A qualitative study design. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with twenty-one Omani nurses from four acute-care hospitals. Interview transcripts were examined using directed content analysis. Results: Participants defined work engagement as a positive state where nurses are engaged physically, emotionally, and mentally with work. Mentally engaged nurses' minds are occupied with patients even when they are off duty. Organizational factors affecting work engagement were leadership, teamwork, autonomy, pay, and job demand. Individual factors affecting engagement included considering nursing a rewarding profession. A social factor was family commitments. Strategies suggested to improve engagement included improved pay and monetary incentives, working system flexibility, open-door policy, performance feedback, recognition, and resources. Conclusion: Mentally engaged nurses are attached to work even when they are off duty. Nurses' gait and facial expressions can indicate high or low work engagement. Nurses with family obligations felt drained of energy, affecting their vigor and enthusiasm at work. Implications. Management skills and practices impact work engagement. Nurse's feedback can be used to improve practice and design interventions that promote nurses' engagement.

Increasing a patient's sense of security in the hospital: A theory of trust and nursing action.

Having a decreased sense of security leads to unnecessary suffering and distress for patients. Establishing trust is critical for nurses to promote a patient's sense of security, consistent with trauma-informed care. Research regarding nursing action, trust, and sense of security is wide-ranging but fragmented. We used theory synthesis to organize the disparate existing knowledge into a testable middle-range theory encompassing these concepts in hospitals. The resulting model illustrates how individuals are admitted to the hospital with some predisposition to trust or mistrust the healthcare system and/or personnel. Patients encounter circumstances increasing their emotional and/or physical vulnerability to harm, leading to experiences of fear and anxiety. Without intervention, fear and anxiety lead to a decreased sense of security, increased distress, and suffering. Nurse action can ameliorate these effects by increasing a hospitalized person's sense of security or by promoting the development of interpersonal trust, also leading to an increased sense of security. Increased sense of security results in diminished anxiety and fear, and increased hopefulness, confidence, calm, sense of value, and sense of control. The consequences of a decreased sense of security are harmful to patients and nurses should know that they can intervene in ways that both increase interpersonal trust and sense of security.

Patient Voices in Hospital Safety during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Hospitalized patients and their families may be reluctant to express safety concerns. We aimed to describe safety and quality concerns experienced by hospitalized patients and families and factors and outcomes surrounding decisions about voicing concerns, including those related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 discharged inpatients or family members in a qualitative descriptive design. Some participants reported concern about staff competency or knowledge, communication and coordination, potential treatment errors, or care environment. Factors influencing feeling safe included healthcare team member characteristics, communication and coordination, and safe care expectations. Reasoning for voicing concerns often included personal characteristics. Reasons for not voicing concerns included feeling no action was needed or the concern was low priority. Outcomes for voicing a concern were categorized as resolved, disregarded, and unknown. These findings support the vital importance of open safety communication and trustworthy response to patients and family members who voice concerns.

Nurse bias and nursing care disparities related to patient characteristics: A scoping review of the quantitative and qualitative evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Investigations of healthcare workers' implicit attitudes about patient characteristics and differences in delivery of healthcare due to bias are increasingly common. However, there is a gap in our understanding of nurse-specific bias and care disparities. AIMS: To identify (a) the types of available evidence, (b) key factors and relationships identified in the evidence and (c) knowledge gaps related to nurse bias (nurse attitudes or beliefs towards a patient characteristic) and nursing care disparities (healthcare disparities related specifically to nursing care). METHODS: Authors completed a scoping review using the Joanne Briggs Institute method and PRISMA-SCR checklist. Five databases were searched. After screening, 215 research reports were included and examined. Data were extracted from research reports and assessed for thematic patterns and trends across multiple characteristics. RESULTS: Nurse bias and/or care disparity investigations have become increasingly common over the 38-year span of included reports. Multiple patient characteristics have been investigated, with the most common being race and/or ethnicity, gender and age. Twenty-nine of 215 studies identified a potential relationship between nurse bias regarding a characteristic and nursing care of individuals with that characteristic. Of these studies, 27 suggested the bias was associated with a negative disparate impact on nursing care. Only 12 reports included evaluating an intervention designed to reduce nurse bias or nursing care-related healthcare disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing research focus on individual bias and disparities in healthcare, the accumulated knowledge regarding nurses has not significantly advanced past a descriptive, exploratory level. Nor has there been a consistent focus on the role of nurses, who represent the largest component of the professional healthcare workforce. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: National and international codes of ethics for nurses require provision of care according to individual, unique patient need, disregarding bias and incorporating patient characteristics into their plan of care.

A grounded theory of creating space for open safety communication between hospitalized patients and nurses.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that fear of negative nurse response may prevent hospitalized patients from sharing safety concerns, adversely affecting patient safety. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to describe the process by which bedside nurses recognize and respond to safety concerns expressed by patients or their families. METHODS: Twenty-five bedside nurses from 30 maternal-child, intensive, medical-surgical, and psychiatric inpatient units within an academic medical center participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using grounded theory. FINDINGS: Nurses reported creating space for open safety communication to foster trust and maintain patient safety and sense of security. Nurses anticipated safety concerns, invited safety discussion, were accessible, recognized insecurity, reacted in a trustworthy way, shared a plan, and followed up with patient and family. DISCUSSION: This process involves multiple interacting components, yet was remarkably consistent across acute care settings, despite differences in nurses, patient populations, and unit cultures.

Nurse Sensemaking for Responding to Patient and Family Safety Concerns.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals need to prevent, respond to, and learn from safety risks and events perceived by patients and families, who in turn rely on nurses to respond to and report their safety concerns. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to describe the process by which bedside nurses evaluate and determine the appropriate response to safety concerns expressed by patients or their families. METHODS: A qualitative design was employed. We recruited inpatient bedside nurses in an 811-bed Midwest academic medical center. Nurses provided demographic information and participated in semistructured interviews designed to elicit narratives related to evaluation and response to patient- or family-expressed safety concerns. Data analysis and interpretation were guided by grounded theory. RESULTS: We enrolled 25 nurses representing 22 units. Based on these nurses' experiences, we developed a grounded theory explaining how nurses evaluate a patient or family safety concern. Nurses make sense of the patient's or family's safety concern in order to take action. Achieving this goal requires evaluation of the meaningfulness and reasonableness of the concern, as well as the potential effect of the concern on the patient. Based on this nursing evaluation, nurses respond in ways designed to (a) manage emotions, (b) immediately resolve concerns, (c) involve other team members, and (d) address fear or uncertain grounding in reality. Nurses reported routinely handling safety concerns at the bedside without use of incident reporting. DISCUSSION: Safety requires an interpersonal and evaluative nursing process with actions responsive to patient and family concerns. Safety interventions designed to be used by nurses should be developed with the dynamic, cognitive, sensemaking nature of nurses' routine safety work in mind. Being sensitive to the vulnerability of patients, respecting patient and family input, and understanding the consequences of dismissing patient and family safety concerns are critical to making sense of the situation and taking appropriate action to maintain safety. Measuring patient safety or planning improvement based on patient or family expression of safety concerns would be a difficult undertaking using only standard approaches. A more complex approach incorporating direct patient engagement in data collection is necessary to gain a complete safety picture.

Ready to Go Home? Assessment of Shared Mental Models of the Patient and Discharging Team Regarding Readiness for Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: A critical task of the inpatient interprofessional team is readying patients for discharge. Assessment of shared mental model (SMM) convergence can determine how much team members agree about patient discharge readiness and how their mental models align with the patient's self-assessment. OBJECTIVE: Determine the convergence of interprofessional team SMMs of hospital discharge readiness and identify factors associated with these assessments. DESIGN: We surveyed interprofessional discharging teams and each team's patient at time of hospital discharge using validated tools to capture their SMMs. PARTICIPANTS: Discharge events (N = 64) from a single hospital consisting of the patient and their team (nurse, coordinator, physician). MEASURES: Clinician and patient versions of the validated Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scales/Short Form (RHDS/SF). We measured team convergence by comparing the individual clinicians' scores on the RHDS/SF, and we measured team-patient convergence as the absolute difference between the Patient-RHDS/SF score and the team average score on the Clinician-RHDS/SF. RESULTS: Discharging teams assessed patients as having high readiness for hospital discharge (mean score, 8.5 out of 10; SD, 0.91). The majority of teams had convergent SMMs with high to very high interrater agreement on discharge readiness (mean r*wg(J), 0.90; SD, 0.10). However, team-patient SMM convergence was low: Teams overestimated the patient's self-assessment of readiness for discharge in 48.4% of events. We found that teams reporting higher-quality teamwork (P = .004) and bachelor's level-trained nurses (P < .001) had more convergent SMMs with the patient. CONCLUSION: Measuring discharge teams' SMM of patient discharge readiness may represent an innovative assessment tool and potential lever to improve the quality of care transitions.

A mixed methods study examining teamwork shared mental models of interprofessional teams during hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how team processes impact providers' abilities to prepare patients for a safe hospital discharge. Teamwork Shared Mental Models (teamwork-SMMs) are the teams' organised understanding of individual member's roles, interactions and behaviours needed to perform a task like hospital discharge. Teamwork-SMMs are linked to team effectiveness in other fields, but have not been readily investigated in healthcare. This study examines teamwork-SMMs to understand how interprofessional teams coordinate care when discharging patients. METHODS: This mixed methods study examined teamwork-SMMs of inpatient interprofessional discharge teams at a single hospital. For each discharge event, we collected data from the patient and their discharge team (nurse, physician and coordinator) using interviews and questionnaires. We quantitatively determined the discharge teams' teamwork-SMM components of quality and convergence using the Shared Mental Model Scale, and then explored their relationships to patient-reported preparation for posthospital care. We used qualitative thematic analysis of narrative cases to examine the contextual differences of discharge teams with higher versus lower teamwork-SMMs. RESULTS: The sample included a total of 106 structured patient interviews, 192 provider day-of-discharge questionnaires and 430 observation hours to examine 64 discharge events. We found that inpatient teams with better teamwork-SMMs (ie, higher perceptions of teamwork quality or greater convergence) were more effective at preparing patients for post-hospital care. Additionally, teams with high and low teamwork-SMMs had different experiences with team cohesion, communication openness and alignment on the patient situation. CONCLUSIONS: Examining the quality and agreement of teamwork-SMMs among teams provides a better understanding of how teams coordinate care and may facilitate the development of specific team-based interventions to improve patient care at hospital discharge.

Realistic Evaluation of a Rapid Response System: Context, Mechanisms, and Outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to describe and explore differences between rapid response system events in a Midwestern community hospital through context, mechanism, and outcome factors. The design was a retrospective review of 1,939 adult inpatient events that occurred on medical (62.8%) and surgical units (37.2%) over 92 months. The immediate outcomes of the events were stabilization (59.0%), transfer to a higher level of care (39%), and cardiopulmonary arrest (2%). Nurses activated 94% of all rapid response events; respiratory (38.8%) and cardiac (29.2%) symptoms were the most common triggers, and worry alone triggered 23% of all events. Medical and surgical events were significantly different with regard to antecedents to unit arrival, most common triggers, immediate clinical outcomes, and occurrence during resource-limited times. Understanding rapid response events and differences between medical and surgical units is important to improve early identification of deterioration and thus intervention for vulnerable patients.

Exploring the Hidden Functions of Nursing Bedside Shift Report: A Performance, Ritual, and Sensemaking Opportunity.

BACKGROUND: Implementing Nursing Bedside Shift Report (NBSR) is challenging for nurse leaders. Before implementing or improving NBSR, nurse leaders need a clear understanding of the process and functions of nursing shift report. However, the social-cultural latent functions (unrecognized or unintended uses) of NBSR are poorly understood. PURPOSE: The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the latent functions of NBSR from the perspectives of frontline nurses. METHODS: Thematic analysis of previously collected semistructured interviews with nurses (n = 13) about NBSR was used to explore NBSR's latent functions. RESULTS: Three latent functions emerged; nurses used bedside shift report as a performance, ritual, and sensemaking opportunity. The latent functions are described, and corresponding recommendations for successful implementation of NBSR are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse leaders can use this study's findings to inform the development or improvement of an efficient, effective, and sustainable NBSR process at their local institution.

Priming patient safety: A middle-range theory of safety goal priming via safety culture communication.

The aim of this paper is discussion of a new middle-range theory of patient safety goal priming via safety culture communication. Bedside nurses are key to safe care, but there is little theory about how organizations can influence nursing behavior through safety culture to improve patient safety outcomes. We theorize patient safety goal priming via safety culture communication may support organizations in this endeavor. According to this theory, hospital safety culture communication activates a previously held patient safety goal and increases the perceived value of actions nurses can take to achieve that goal. Nurses subsequently prioritize and are motivated to perform tasks and risk assessment related to achieving patient safety. These efforts continue until nurses mitigate or ameliorate identified risks and hazards during the patient care encounter. Critically, this process requires nurses to have a previously held safety goal associated with a repertoire of appropriate actions. This theory suggests undergraduate educators should foster an outcomes focus emphasizing the connections between nursing interventions and safety outcomes, hospitals should strategically structure patient safety primes into communicative activities, and organizations should support professional development including new skills and the latest evidence supporting nursing practice for patient safety.

Priming Patient Safety Through Nursing Handoff Communication: A Simulation Pilot Study.

Understanding how safety culture mechanisms affect nursing safety-oriented behavior and thus patient outcomes is critical to developing hospital safety programs. Safety priming refers to communicating safety values intended to activate patient safety goals. Safety priming through nursing handoff communication was tested as a means by which cultural safety values may affect nursing practice. The mixed-methods pilot study setting was an academic medical center's high-fidelity simulation lab. Twenty nurses were randomized into intervention and control groups. The intervention group received a safety priming intervention; all participants were observed for completing appropriate actions in response to patient safety risks embedded in a scenario. Stimulated recall interviews were conducted following simulation completion. Nurses receiving the safety priming intervention performed slightly but non-significantly more safety actions than nurses who did not (60.5% vs. 57.9% of 43 actions). Implications for both research and practice are discussed for interventions targeting routine versus safety goal-directed nursing actions.

Handing Off Safety at the Bedside.

The study purpose was to describe how bedside nurses can use nursing bedside shift report (NBSR) to keep patients safe. NBSR has been recommended as a means of increasing patient safety, but little is known about how or whether it does so. Grounded theory methods were used. Data were collected from 2014 to 2015 with bedside nurses in a pediatric unit with an established NBSR process. The primary process by which bedside nurses use NBSR to keep patients safe is reducing risk of harm through conveying the patient story from shift to shift. Having a perspective from the bedside is a key antecedent to reducing risk of harm, as it supports the nurses' ability to subsequently identify and address risks. Although often seen as a routine exchange of information, how nursing shift report is conducted can impact patient safety. The study reinforces the value of targeting nursing communication to improve patient safety.

It's always something: hospital nurses managing risk.

The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the process by which hospital staff nurses keep patients safe within their hospital safety culture. Findings from this study culminated in a grounded theory of Managing Risk, the process by which nurses keep their patients safe from harm. Participants perceived that their patients were always at risk (it's always something), thus keeping patients safe was a continual, repetitive process of managing risk to prevent harm to patients. Stages of this process included risk assessment, risk recognition, prioritization, and protective interventions. Practicing nurses can use this theory to understand and articulate their critical role in keeping patients safe in hospitals. Further examination of this process is necessary for targeted assessment of a safety culture's impact on bedside nursing practice, thus providing a basis for specific interventions to improve patient safety.

The relationship between safety culture and patient outcomes: results from pilot meta-analyses.

Patient safety continues to be a serious health concern in acute-care hospitals. Safety culture has been a frequent target for patient safety improvement over the past decade, based on recommendations from the Institute of Medicine and its use in industry. However, the relationship between safety culture and patient safety in acute-care hospitals has yet to be systematically examined. Thus, a meta-analysis was devised to examine the relationship between patient safety outcomes and safety culture in that setting. Due to the limited empirical research reports available, five small pilot meta-analyses were conducted, examining the relationship between safety culture and each of the following: pressure ulcers, falls, medication errors, nurse-sensitive outcomes, and post-operative outcomes. No significant relationships of any size were identified. An assessment of the relevant literature is presented, offering potential explanations for this surprising finding and an agenda for future research.

Heart failure care management programs: a review of study interventions and meta-analysis of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to describe and quantify individual interventions used in multicomponent outpatient heart failure management programs. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between 1995 and 2008 were searched using 10 search terms. Randomized controlled trials evaluating outpatient programs that addressed comprehensive care to decrease readmissions for patients with heart failure were identified. Forty-three articles reporting on 35 studies that reported readmissions separately from other outcomes were included. Three investigators independently abstracted primary study characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: In the 35 studies, participants included 8071 subjects who were typically older (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [6.5] years) and male (59%). Using our coding scheme, the number of individual interventions within a program ranged from 1 to 7 within individual studies; the most commonly used interventions were patient education, symptom monitoring by study staff, symptom monitoring by patients, and medication adherence strategies. Most programs had a teaching component with a mean (SD) of 6.4 (3.9) individual topics covered; frequent teaching topics were symptom recognition and management, medication review, and self-monitoring. Fewer than half of the 35 studies reviewed reported adequate data to be included in the meta-analysis. Some outcomes were infrequently reported, limiting statistical power to detect treatment effects. CONCLUSION: A number of studies evaluating multicomponent HF management programs have found positive effects on important patient outcomes. The contribution of the individual interventions included in the multicomponent program on patient outcomes remains unclear. Future studies of chronic disease interventions must include descriptions of recommended key program components to identify critical program components.

Secrets of successful short grant applications.

The National Institutes of Health has implemented new grant application guidelines that include a substantial reduction in the number of pages allowed for project descriptions. Shorter proposals will potentially decrease reviewer burden, but investigators may find the new page limits challenging. Writing more concisely while still presenting a persuasive argument requires honing certain skills with regard to preparation, construction, and editing of proposals. This article provides strategies from the Western Journal of Nursing Research editorial board for preparing competitive shorter research proposals. Two key strategies for success are fully conceptualizing the study prior to writing and obtaining assistance from experienced colleagues during the editing process.

Protecting the power of interventions through proper reporting.

Authors, reviewers, and journal editors are responsible for ensuring that standards of research reporting include detailed descriptions of interventions. The impact of nursing intervention research is much reduced when interventions are poorly described. Nursing research reports often fail to detail descriptions of interventions sufficiently to move future research forward, apply new knowledge in practice, and refine theories. To address this deficit, the authors constructed detailed guidelines for reporting interventions. Based on a review of health care literature, these guidelines include a discussion of theoretical, participant, interventionist, content, and delivery intervention elements with rationale for their inclusion. Suggestions for presenting this information in limited journal space are also presented.