MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466850020 · doi:10.1111/nicc.12233

Deteriorating work environments for critical care nurses: how urgent is this issue and what can be done?

2016· editorial· en· W2466850020 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sandra Goldsworthy

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing in Critical Care · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadPraiseNursingPatient safetyWork (physics)Intensive care unitIntensive careMedicineQuality (philosophy)Health careCritical care nursingJob satisfactionBurnoutPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical care units have the highest nurse turnover with unhealthy work environments listed among the top factors (O'Brien-Pallas et al., 2010). The cost of nurse turnover in the intensive care unit (ICU) is multi-faceted. As nurses make the decision to leave the ICU, not only is there a large financial cost to the organization in terms of the financial resources required to recruit and retrain additional nurses but there is also a significant cost to staff morale, productivity and patient safety. As the international nursing shortage worsens and is compounded by deteriorating work environments in critical care, we are seeing a change in the proportion of experienced nurses to new graduate or novice nurses working in the ICU. As this trend continues globally, an increased exodus of experienced ICU nurses with an increased proportion of novice nurses joining ICUs, it will most certainly have a negative impact on the quality and safety of patient care. How healthy is your work environment? Healthy work environments are those defined as: ‘…a practice setting that maximizes health and well-being of nurses, quality of patient outcomes and organizational system performance’ (Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), 2013). There are many factors that influence our perception of the environment that we work in. Included among the most crucial factors that matter most are: workload and resources, leadership ability and style, collegial nurse/physician relationships, praise and recognition, participation in decision-making and time to nurse. In a systematic review that examined leadership practices and intent to stay among nurses, a relational leadership style was found to positively influence work environment and intent to stay among nurses (Cowden et al., 2011). Transformational nurse leaders are inspirational, utilize shared decision making, mentor nurses, are visible and provide praise and recognition. Visibility can be very difficult and challenging for nurse managers because many have a large span of control with extremely large numbers of nurses reporting to them and potentially more than one unit to manage. A growing trend appears to be an influx of managers who are not nurses by profession and are charged with managing nurses. It is unclear what impact having non-nurse managers in areas such as critical care will have on the current nursing workforce, retention and staff nurses' perception of the work environment. Peer group cohesion and strong relations with physicians have important implications for the work environment we work in. How would you rate relationships with your coworkers? When relationships in the workplace are strained, decreased work satisfaction and burnout can result. Supportive coworkers can ease transition of new nurses into critical care and increase their likelihood of staying on the job. What strategies does your unit have in place to foster strong teams? Because nurses have many transferable skills, the issue is that experienced nurses may not only decide to leave the ICU but may decide to leave the nursing profession altogether when they are dissatisfied with their work environment. It is important to note that when a nurse makes the decision to leave her position that this decision is typically made gradually over 6–12 months in advance of leaving. One of the top concrete forms of recognition that nurses list would motivate them to stay on the job is the availability of professional development opportunities such as conferences, formal education, inservices and workshops that provide ongoing learning opportunities (Abualrub and Al-Zaru, 2008; Ulrich et al., 2009). An example of a professional development opportunity that is gaining traction among critical care nurses and has been linked to intent to stay in the ICU and in the nursing profession, is participation in high-fidelity simulation (Goldsworthy, 2015). Simulation provides a hands-on, experiential learning activity for critical care nurses through participation in comprehensive case-based scenarios. Through simulated cases that mimic the critical care setting, nurses can build their competency and confidence by repetition of high risk/low frequency skills in a safe environment. The need to develop strategies to improve work environments for critical care nurses is urgent. If deteriorating work environments are not addressed immediately, we will continue to lose greater numbers of critical care nurses. Who better to develop solutions and strategies than the front line ICU nurses? Investing in retention strategies for critical care nurses with stable, sustainable funding will assist in stabilizing the critical care nurse workforce globally. I would urge critical care nurses to join together, develop action teams to work on solutions and strategies related to this important issue. Once innovations are developed in this area of improving work environments and retaining our experienced critical care nurse workforce, it will become important to share these successes with other nurses at local and international gatherings (i.e. the BACCN annual conference). Working with nurses from other countries to add to potential strategies may broaden our thinking around this important issue. It may be time to convene an international ‘think tank’ on work environments for critical care nurses. Again, I ask you, how healthy is your work environment? Do you have strong leadership and relational managers? Do you have collaborative nurse/physician relations? Do you feel your effort is valued and that you receive recognition and praise for a job well done? Is there an investment in ongoing professional development opportunities such as simulation and a culture of learning for nurses on your unit? How manageable is the workload and do you have the resources available to do the job in your unit? Do you have ‘time to nurse’ and are you involved in decision making? If you have answered ‘no’ to any of these questions, this is the time to act. There has never been a better time to join together, have a voice and take a grass roots approach to developing strategies that will work. Not only will this improve our working environments but it may also stem the flow of highly experienced nurses from critical care. More research is needed to determine strategies that will facilitate healthy work environments for nurses. The empirical literature has established the risks to nurse retention and poor patient outcomes related to deteriorating work environments. We need to urgently continue the dialogue and push this agenda forward by working together to create and trial solutions and strategies that will improve working conditions for all nurses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.408 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing in Critical CareSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207