A model of occupational stress to assess impact of COVID-19 on critical care and redeployed nurses: a mixed-methods study.

Janice Rattray, Jordan Miller, Beth Pollard, Louise McCallum, Alastair Hull, Pam Ramsay, Lisa Salisbury, Teresa Scott, Stephen Cole, Diane Dixon
{"title":"A model of occupational stress to assess impact of COVID-19 on critical care and redeployed nurses: a mixed-methods study.","authors":"Janice Rattray, Jordan Miller, Beth Pollard, Louise McCallum, Alastair Hull, Pam Ramsay, Lisa Salisbury, Teresa Scott, Stephen Cole, Diane Dixon","doi":"10.3310/PWRT8714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To use the job demands-resources model of occupational stress to quantify and explain the impact of working in critical care during the COVID-19 pandemic on nurses and their employing organisation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Two-phase mixed methods: a cross-sectional survey (January 2021-March 2022), with comparator baseline data from April to October 2018 (critical care nurses only), and semistructured interviews.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Critical care nurses (<i>n</i> = 461) and nurses redeployed to critical care (<i>n</i> = 200) who worked in the United Kingdom National Health Service (primarily Scotland) between January 2021 and March 2022. The 2018 survey was completed by 557 critical care nurses (Scotland only). Survey response rate in Scotland was 32% but could not be determined outside Scotland. Forty-four nurses were interviewed (critical care = 28, redeployed = 16).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey measured job demands, job resources, health impairment, work engagement and organisational outcomes. Data were compared to 2018 data. Regression analyses identified predictors of health impairment, work engagement and organisational outcomes. Semistructured interviews were conducted remotely, audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed deductively using framework analysis.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Three-quarters of nurses reached threshold for psychological distress, approximately 50% reached threshold for burnout emotional exhaustion and a third clinically concerning post-traumatic stress symptoms. Compared to 2018, critical care nurses were at elevated risk of probable psychological distress, odds ratio 6.03 (95% CI 4.75 to 7.95); burnout emotional exhaustion, odds ratio 4.02 (3.07 to 5.26); burnout depersonalisation, odds ratio 3.18 (1.99 to 5.07); burnout accomplishment, odds ratio 1.53 (1.18 to 1.97). There were no differences between critical care and redeployed nurses on health impairment outcomes, suggesting elevated risk would apply to redeployed nurses. Job demands increased and resources decreased during the pandemic. Higher job demands predicted greater psychological distress. Job resources reduced the negative impact of job demands on psychological distress, but this moderating effect was not observed at higher levels of demand. All organisational outcomes worsened. Lack of resources predicted worse organisational outcomes. In interviews, staff described the pace and amount, complexity, physical and emotional effort of their work as the most difficult job demands. The sustained high-demand environment impacted physical and psychological well-being, with most interviewees experiencing emotional and physical exhaustion, burnout, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Camaraderie and support from colleagues and supervisors were core job resources. The combination of sustained demands and their impact on staff well-being incurred negative organisational consequences, with increasing numbers considering leaving their specialty or nursing altogether. Dissemination events with a range of stakeholders, including study participants, identified staffing issues and lack of learning and development opportunities as problematic. Critical care nurses are concerned about the future delivery of high-quality critical care services. Positive aspects were identified, for example, reduced bureaucratic systems, increased local autonomy and decision-making, recognition of the critical care nurse skill set.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The National Health Service needs to recognise the impact of COVID-19 on this staff group, prioritise the welfare of critical care nurses, implement workplace change/planning, and support them to recover from the pandemic. The National Health Service is struggling to retain critical care nurses and, unless staff welfare is improved, quality of care and patient safety will likely decline.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i> as award number NIHR132068.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/PWRT8714","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To use the job demands-resources model of occupational stress to quantify and explain the impact of working in critical care during the COVID-19 pandemic on nurses and their employing organisation.

Design: Two-phase mixed methods: a cross-sectional survey (January 2021-March 2022), with comparator baseline data from April to October 2018 (critical care nurses only), and semistructured interviews.

Participants: Critical care nurses (n = 461) and nurses redeployed to critical care (n = 200) who worked in the United Kingdom National Health Service (primarily Scotland) between January 2021 and March 2022. The 2018 survey was completed by 557 critical care nurses (Scotland only). Survey response rate in Scotland was 32% but could not be determined outside Scotland. Forty-four nurses were interviewed (critical care = 28, redeployed = 16).

Methods: A survey measured job demands, job resources, health impairment, work engagement and organisational outcomes. Data were compared to 2018 data. Regression analyses identified predictors of health impairment, work engagement and organisational outcomes. Semistructured interviews were conducted remotely, audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed deductively using framework analysis.

Findings: Three-quarters of nurses reached threshold for psychological distress, approximately 50% reached threshold for burnout emotional exhaustion and a third clinically concerning post-traumatic stress symptoms. Compared to 2018, critical care nurses were at elevated risk of probable psychological distress, odds ratio 6.03 (95% CI 4.75 to 7.95); burnout emotional exhaustion, odds ratio 4.02 (3.07 to 5.26); burnout depersonalisation, odds ratio 3.18 (1.99 to 5.07); burnout accomplishment, odds ratio 1.53 (1.18 to 1.97). There were no differences between critical care and redeployed nurses on health impairment outcomes, suggesting elevated risk would apply to redeployed nurses. Job demands increased and resources decreased during the pandemic. Higher job demands predicted greater psychological distress. Job resources reduced the negative impact of job demands on psychological distress, but this moderating effect was not observed at higher levels of demand. All organisational outcomes worsened. Lack of resources predicted worse organisational outcomes. In interviews, staff described the pace and amount, complexity, physical and emotional effort of their work as the most difficult job demands. The sustained high-demand environment impacted physical and psychological well-being, with most interviewees experiencing emotional and physical exhaustion, burnout, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Camaraderie and support from colleagues and supervisors were core job resources. The combination of sustained demands and their impact on staff well-being incurred negative organisational consequences, with increasing numbers considering leaving their specialty or nursing altogether. Dissemination events with a range of stakeholders, including study participants, identified staffing issues and lack of learning and development opportunities as problematic. Critical care nurses are concerned about the future delivery of high-quality critical care services. Positive aspects were identified, for example, reduced bureaucratic systems, increased local autonomy and decision-making, recognition of the critical care nurse skill set.

Conclusions: The National Health Service needs to recognise the impact of COVID-19 on this staff group, prioritise the welfare of critical care nurses, implement workplace change/planning, and support them to recover from the pandemic. The National Health Service is struggling to retain critical care nurses and, unless staff welfare is improved, quality of care and patient safety will likely decline.

Funding: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research as award number NIHR132068.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估COVID-19对重症监护和重新部署护士影响的职业压力模型:一项混合方法研究
目的:利用职业压力的工作需求-资源模型,量化和解释COVID-19大流行期间重症监护工作对护士及其用人单位的影响。设计:两阶段混合方法:横断面调查(2021年1月- 2022年3月),2018年4月至10月比较基线数据(仅限重症护理护士)和半结构化访谈。参与者:在2021年1月至2022年3月期间在英国国家卫生局(主要是苏格兰)工作的重症监护护士(n = 461)和重新部署到重症监护的护士(n = 200)。2018年的调查由557名重症护理护士完成(仅限苏格兰)。苏格兰的调查回复率为32%,但苏格兰以外的地区则无法确定。访谈44名护士(危重病护理28名,调任护士16名)。方法:通过问卷调查测量工作需求、工作资源、健康损害、工作投入和组织成果。数据与2018年的数据进行了比较。回归分析确定了健康损害、工作投入和组织成果的预测因素。半结构化访谈是远程进行的,录音和转录。采用框架分析法对数据进行演绎分析。研究结果:四分之三的护士达到了心理困扰的阈值,大约50%达到了倦怠情绪衰竭的阈值,三分之一的护士达到了创伤后应激症状的临床阈值。与2018年相比,重症护理护士可能出现心理困扰的风险增加,优势比为6.03 (95% CI 4.75至7.95);倦怠情绪衰竭,优势比4.02 (3.07 ~ 5.26);倦怠型人格解体,优势比3.18 (1.99 - 5.07);倦怠成就感,优势比为1.53(1.18 ~ 1.97)。重症护理和重新部署的护士在健康损害结果上没有差异,表明风险升高适用于重新部署的护士。大流行期间,工作需求增加,资源减少。更高的工作要求预示着更大的心理压力。工作资源减少了工作需求对心理困扰的负面影响,但在较高的需求水平上没有观察到这种调节作用。所有组织成果都恶化了。缺乏资源预示着更糟糕的组织结果。在采访中,员工将工作的速度和数量、复杂性、体力和情感上的努力描述为最困难的工作要求。持续的高要求环境影响了身心健康,大多数受访者经历了情绪和身体上的疲惫、倦怠和创伤后应激障碍的症状。同事和主管的友情和支持是核心的工作资源。持续的需求及其对员工福利的影响对组织产生了负面影响,越来越多的人考虑完全离开他们的专业或护理。与包括研究参与者在内的一系列利益攸关方开展的宣传活动确定了人员配备问题以及缺乏学习和发展机会的问题。重症监护护士关心的是未来提供高质量的重症监护服务。确定了积极的方面,例如,减少了官僚制度,增加了地方自治和决策,对重症护理护士技能的认可。结论:国家卫生服务体系需要认识到COVID-19对这一工作人员群体的影响,优先考虑重症监护护士的福利,实施工作场所变革/规划,并支持他们从大流行中恢复过来。国民保健服务正在努力留住重症护理护士,除非员工福利得到改善,否则护理质量和患者安全可能会下降。资助:本摘要介绍了由国家卫生和保健研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会保健提供研究资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR132068。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Systematic review of integrated mental and physical health services for children and young people with eating and functional symptoms. Peer support for adult social care in prisons in England and Wales: a mixed-methods rapid evaluation. A model of occupational stress to assess impact of COVID-19 on critical care and redeployed nurses: a mixed-methods study. Exploratory study from an end-of-life research partnership network to improve access for ethnically diverse communities in one region. Early mental health intervention and supported self-care for LGBTQ+ young people in the UK: a mixed-methods study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1