Nurse leaders’ experiences of upwards violence in the workplace: a qualitative systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to synthesize the qualitative literature on the experience of upwards violence in nursing workplaces directed towards nurse leaders who have authority over those who direct the violence towards them. INTRODUCTION: Workplace violence has impacted nursing work life for decades. It has been studied mostly from a downwards and lateral perspective and less often from an upwards direction towards individuals in leadership positions. Little is known about the experiences of nurse leaders or the potential consequences of workplace violence, including what impact upwards violence has on leadership ability and sustainability. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review considered qualitative studies that included nurse leaders who experienced upwards violence in nursing workplaces from nurses they supervise. Nurse leaders were registered nurses or advanced practice nurses employed in a position where they supervised other nursing personnel (eg, registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, nurse practitioners, student nurses). The positions held by nurse leaders included all roles (eg, nurse manager, clinical nurse specialist, nurse practitioner, nursing professor) where the position included supervising other nursing personnel. METHODS: The search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished studies in English from 2000. The search was first conducted in January 2019 and rerun in June 2020. The databases searched included CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase. To ensure full coverage, databases not specific to the nursing profession, but with potential content on upwards violence, were also searched for examples of upwards violence against nurse leaders. These databases were ABI/INFORM, Sociological Abstracts, LexisNexis Academic, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search for unpublished studies included ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Google Scholar, OpenGrey Repository, Health Business Elite, and Factiva. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria were appraised by two independent reviewers for methodological quality using the JBI critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. Data extraction was conducted according to the standardized data extraction tool from JBI. The qualitative research findings were pooled using the JBI method of meta-aggregation. RESULTS: Six papers were included in the review yielding a total of 50 findings and nine categories. The categories were aggregated to form three synthesized findings: i) Physical, psychological, financial, and quality-of-work toll of upwards bullying: paying a high price; ii) Coping with violence alone; and iii) What happened to me? My take on the violence. The ConQual scores were low to moderate. CONCLUSION: The synthesized findings reveal that nurse leaders' experiences of upwards workplace violence is a troublesome problem that leads to a negative impact on physical and psychological health, and creates a cost in terms of time, money, and efficacy of the workplace.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».