MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311934565 · doi:10.1111/jan.15546

Change fatigue in nursing: An integrative review

2022· review· en· W4311934565 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lindsay Beaulieu, Cydnee Seneviratne, Lorelli Nowell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOBurnoutMEDLINENursingScopusFeelingNursing literaturePsychologySystematic reviewMedicineApplied psychologyPsychological interventionClinical psychologyAlternative medicineSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To synthesize the empirical and theoretical literature on change fatigue in nursing, including how change fatigue affects nurses, the nursing profession and strategies to prevent and overcome it. BACKGROUND: Change fatigue refers to the overwhelming feelings of stress, exhaustion and burnout associated with rapid and continuous change across healthcare organizations. Change fatigue can affect nurses' wellbeing, yet there is a distinct lack of literature which synthesizes the relationship between cumulative organizational change and nurses' wellbeing. DESIGN: Integrative review following Toronto and Remington and Whittemore and Knafl methodology. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in CINAHL, Embase, Medline, APA PsycInfo, Scopus, Business Source Complete and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global in January 2022. REVIEW METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify literature on change fatigue in nursing. Included literature were critically appraised for methodological quality. Data from each article were abstracted and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-six articles were included in this review, including 14 empirical studies, 10 theoretical papers and two literature reviews. Five main themes described in the literature included: definitions, preceding factors, associated behaviours, consequences and mitigation strategies for change fatigue. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the impact of rapid and continuous change on nurses and nursing practice. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between change fatigue and burnout, understand how and why nurses withdraw or avoid change, and to develop a metric to measure change fatigue when considering new change initiatives. IMPACT: Findings from this review generated an improved understanding of how change fatigue affects nurses, the nursing profession and strategies to prevent and overcome it. This paper provides practical recommendations for future research, direction for nursing educators and leaders, and encourages nurses to practice political agency with change management. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This project was an integrative review of the literature therefore no patient or public contribution was necessary.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207