MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4414166827 · doi:10.11124/jbies-24-00317

Registered nurses’ experiences of organizational change in acute care settings: a qualitative systematic review

2025· article· en· W4414166827 sur OpenAlexaff
Darlaine Jantzen, Lenora Marcellus, Danielle Damianos, Geraldine Irlbacher

Notice bibliographique

RevueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNursing
ThématiqueNursing education and management
Établissements canadiensTrinity Western UniversityUniversity of VictoriaWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGermanAcute careQualitative researchMEDLINEPatient careParticipant observation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to describe the experiences of registered nurses (RNs) providing direct patient care in acute care settings undergoing organizational change. INTRODUCTION: RNs, comprising the largest group of health care professionals in the hospital setting, are directly influenced by organizational change. Exploring their experiences will contribute to better strategic planning within hospital systems. An understanding of both the positive and negative experiences of ubiquitous organizational change, and the factors that mitigate negative effects, is essential to retaining precious health human resources, specifically nurses in acute care. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Qualitative studies of RNs working in direct patient care in acute care settings with experiences of organizational change were included. Quantitative studies and studies of other health care professionals, including those where midwives are not RNs, were excluded. Studies limited to organizational change that involved planned, purposeful change impacting daily nursing practice were included. METHODS: An initial search was conducted in MEDLINE (EBSCOhost) and CINAHL (EBSCOhost), followed by a full search in CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Business Source Complete, ERIC (all via EBSCOhost), PubMed, and gray literature sources. Original searches were conducted in June 2017 and updated in July 2023. There were no search limits. We followed the JBI approach for study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and synthesis. Synthesized findings were assessed using ConQual. RESULTS: Seventy-nine studies were eligible for inclusion after full-text review, but after assessing methodological quality, 5 were ineligible for lacking representation of participant voices. In total, 74 studies with 471 findings were included in the review. The earliest study was from 1987, with the majority published between 2013 and 2023. Most were phenomenological, hermeneutic, or grounded theory studies. Sixteen countries were represented in the included studies, with almost half from the US and England. The 5 synthesized findings are: i) Nurses experienced a lack of meaningful participatory approaches and effective preparation and planning; ii) Nurses identified facilitators to help them navigate change at intrapersonal, leadership, and organizational levels, with two-way communication an overarching facilitator; iii) Nurses experienced a range of affective responses in direct response to organizational change; iv) Nurses experienced impacts on their care practices, nursing identity, workload, roles, and everyday responsibilities, which influenced the quality and safety of patient care; and v) Organizational change led to altered relationships at organizational, unit, team, and nurse-patient levels. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the included studies was high, giving strength to this review. Engaging nurses from the point of care prior to any health care change is essential for minimizing the negative impact on the quality of patient care and for increasing effective, efficient, and respectful change. Nurses are affected by chaotic, non-participatory initiatives that fail to improve the quality of patient care. Early, ongoing, and effective two-way communication across the process of change is essential. Health care leadership can contribute to positive experiences of change by engaging with nurses' commitments to high-quality patient care. Practice recommendations include participatory approaches with ongoing two-way communication across all levels of organizational change. A quantitative systemic review and evaluation research related to organizational change are recommended. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023442473. SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT: Translations of the review abstract are available in Arabic http://links.lww.com/SRX/A117 , French http://links.lww.com/SRX/A118 , and German http://links.lww.com/SRX/A119 .

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,752
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,711

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,035
Tête enseignante GPT0,402
Écart entre enseignants0,367 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJBI Evidence SynthesisMême sujetNursing education and managementTravaux en français237 207