MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systematic review of evidence on the impact of nursing workload and staffing on establishing healthy work environments

2006· article· en· W2029007263 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Pearson, Linda OʼBrien Pallas, Donna Thomson, Eric Doucette, Donna Tucker, Rick Wiechula, Leslye Long, Kylie Porritt, Zoe Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsRegistered Nurses' Association of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadStaffingCINAHLMEDLINENursingHealth careWork (physics)Computer scienceMedicineOperations managementKnowledge managementPsychological interventionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Background This systematic review set out to examine the impact, if any, of nursing workload and staffing on creating and maintaining healthy work environments. For the purposes of this review, the term 'healthy work environment' was defined as '. . . a practice setting that maximizes the health and well-being of nurses, quality patient outcomes and organizational performance'. This definition identifies nurse, patient and organisational outcomes as indicators of the establishment and maintenance of a healthy work environment. Objectives The review sought to determine the impact of: • Patient characteristics, nurse characteristics, system characteristics and system processes on workload, scheduling and concepts of productivity and utilisation • Workload, scheduling and concepts of productivity and utilisation on the quality of outcomes for clients, nurses and the system/organisation Search strategy The search strategy sought to find both published and unpublished studies and papers written in the English language. A three-step search strategy approach was used. An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL databases was undertaken to identify optimal search terms followed by an analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe the article. A second extensive search using all identified keywords and index terms was then undertaken. The third step consisted of a search of the reference lists of all identified reports and articles for additional studies. Selection criteria Types of studies: This review considered research papers that addressed the appropriateness and effectiveness of workload and staffing concepts in fostering a healthy work environment in healthcare. The types of papers to be considered included: meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, descriptive studies and correlational studies. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The review considered all participants involved or affected by workload and staffing concepts within the nursing workforce in a healthcare environment, including staff and patients. System and policy issues were also considered. Types of interventions: All workload and staffing strategies that impact on the work environment, patient and nurse outcomes were considered in this review. Types of outcome measures: Outcomes of interest were categorised into four groups: nursing staff outcomes, patient outcomes, organisational outcomes and system outcomes. Data collection and analysis Following assessment of methodological quality, data were extracted using data extraction tools based on the work of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Statistical pooling was not possible and findings were presented in narrative form. Results Of the 2162 papers identified in the search, 171 were selected for full paper retrieval and assessed independently by two reviewers for methodological quality. A total of 40 papers were included in the review: one systematic review; one cohort study; and 38 correlational descriptive studies. Results were summarised in narrative form. The evidence suggests strong correlations between patient characteristics and work environments; and workload and staffing and the quality of outcomes for clients, nurses and the system/organisation. This gave rise to a number of recommendations for practice and for further research, such as: • A greater proportion of regulated staffing (i.e. registered nurses, enrolled nurses, practical or vocational nurses) is associated with improved outcomes related to the Functional Independence Measure score, the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality score, patient satisfaction with nursing care, patient adverse events (including atelectasis, decubitus ulcers, falls, pneumonia, postsurgical and treatment infection and urinary tract infections) • An increase in the number of registered nurse hours available is associated with improved patient outcomes in relation to falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers, urinary tract infection, length of stay and postoperative infection rates.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.172
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations70
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Evidence-Based HealthcareSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207