Moral distress among nurses: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress is recognized as a problem affecting healthcare professionals globally. Unaddressed moral distress may lead to withdrawal from the moral dimensions of patient care, burnout, or leaving the profession. Despite the importance, studies related to moral distress are scant in Thailand. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the experience of moral distress and related factors among Thai nurses. DESIGN: A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used. The quantitative and qualitative data were collected in parallel using the Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals and interview guide. The analysis was conducted separately and then integrated. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were Thai nurses from two large tertiary care institutions in a Southern province of Thailand. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This study was approved by our organization's Institutional Review Board for Health Sciences Research, and by the Institutional Review Boards of the two local institutions in Thailand. Permission from the publisher was received to translate and utilize the Measure of Moral Distress (MMD-HP) under the license number: 4676990097151. RESULTS: A total of 462 participants completed the survey questions. The top 7 causes of moral distress were related to system-level root causes and end-of-life care situations. Hierarchical multiple regression showed that work units, considering leaving position, and number of moral distress episodes in the past year were significant predictors of moral distress. Twenty interviews demonstrated three main themes of distressing causes: (1) powerlessness (at patients/family-, team-, and organizational-levels), (2) end-of-life issues, and (3) poor team function (poor communication and collaboration, incompetent healthcare providers, and inappropriate behavior of colleagues). The integration of data from both components indicated that the qualitative interviews enrich the quantitative findings, especially as related to the top 7 causes of moral distress. DISCUSSION: Although the experience of moral distress among Thai nurses is similar to studies conducted elsewhere, the patient's and family's religious perspective that ties into the concept of moral distress needs to be explored. CONCLUSIONS: Although the root causes of moral distress are similar among different cultures, the experience of Thai nurses may vary according to culture and context.

Moral distress experienced by non-Western nurses: An integrative review.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress has been identified as a significant issue in nursing practice for many decades. However, most studies have involved American nurses or Western medicine settings. Cultural differences between Western and non-Western countries might influence the experience of moral distress. Therefore, the literature regarding moral distress experiences among non-Western nurses is in need of review. AIM: The aim of this integrative review was to identify, describe, and synthesize previous primary studies on moral distress experienced by non-Western nurses. REVIEW METHOD: Whittemore and Knafl's integrative review methodology was used to structure and conduct the review of the literature. RESEARCH CONTEXT AND DATA SOURCES: Key relevant health databases included the Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. Two relevant journals, Nursing Ethics and Bioethics, were manually searched. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION: We have considered and respected ethical conduct when performing a literature review, respecting authorship and referencing sources. FINDINGS: A total of 17 primary studies published between 1999 and 2019 were appraised. There was an inconsistency with regard to moral distress levels and its relationship with demographic variables. The most commonly cited clinical causes of moral distress were providing futile care for end-of-life patients. Unit/team constraints (poor collaboration and communication, working with incompetent colleagues, witnessing practice errors, and professional hierarchy) and organizational constraints (limited resources, excessive administrative work, conflict within hospital policy, and perceived lack of support by administrators) were identified as moral distress's stimulators. Negative impacts on nurses' physical, psychological, and spiritual well-being were also reported. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to investigate moral distress among other healthcare professions which may further build understanding. More importantly, interventions to address moral distress need to be developed and tested.

Enhancing Understanding of Moral Distress: The Measure of Moral Distress for Health Care Professionals.

BACKGROUND: As ongoing research explores the impact of moral distress on health care professionals (HCPs) and organizations and seeks to develop effective interventions, valid and reliable instruments to measure moral distress are needed. This article describes the development and testing of a revision of the widely used Moral Distress Scale-Revised (MDS-R) to measure moral distress. METHODS: We revised the MDS-R by evaluating the combined data from 22 previous studies, assessing 301 write-in items and 209 root causes identified through moral distress consultation, and reviewing 14 recent publications from various professions in which root causes were described. The revised 27-item scale, the Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP), is usable by all HCPs in adult and pediatric critical, acute, or long-term acute care settings. We then assessed the reliability of the MMD-HP and evaluated construct validity via hypothesis testing. The MMD-HP, Hospital Ethical Climate Survey (HECS), and a demographic survey were distributed electronically via Qualtrics to nurses, physicians, and other health care professionals at two academic medical centers over a 3-week period. RESULTS: In total, 653 surveys were included in the final analysis. The MMD-HP demonstrated good reliability. The four hypotheses were supported: (1) MMD-HP scores were higher for nurses (M 112.3, SD 73.2) than for physicians (M 96.3, SD 54.7, p = 0.023). (2) MMD-HP scores were higher for those considering leaving their position (M 168.4, SD 75.8) than for those not considering leaving (M 94.3, SD 61.2, p < 0.001). (3) The MMD-HP was negatively correlated with the HECS (r = -0.55, p < 0.001). (4) An exploratory factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure, reflective of patient, unit, and system levels of moral distress. CONCLUSIONS: The MMD-HP represents the most currently understood causes of moral distress. Because the instrument behaves as would be predicted, we recommend that the MMD-HP replace the MDS-R.