Critical Care Nurses’ Perceptions of Preparedness and Ability to Care for the Dying and Their Professional Quality of Life

2013 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 184-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vidette Todaro-Franceschi
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sedigheh Salimi ◽  
Vahid Pakpour ◽  
Azad Rahmani ◽  
Marian Wilson ◽  
Hossein Feizollahzadeh

Introduction: This study investigated the relationship between compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction among Iranian nurses working in critical care units. Method: A cross-sectional, descriptive survey using the Professional Quality of Life instrument was administered to 400 nurses working in the intensive care units of Iranian hospitals. Results: High risk levels of burnout and secondary traumatic stress existed among 42% and 96% of participants, respectively. Significant positive relationships were detected between burnout and secondary traumatic stress. An inverse relationship was detected between measures of compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction. Discussion: To ensure culturally congruent care, it is important to evaluate professional quality of life within the context of specific cultures and societies. Iranian critical care nurses are at risk for burnout and secondary traumatic stress. Personal self-care and organizational wellness approaches that consider cultural norms should be designed to boost compassion satisfaction and reduce negative effects of stressful work environments.


2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 32-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara L. Sacco ◽  
Susan M. Ciurzynski ◽  
Megan Elizabeth Harvey ◽  
Gail L. Ingersoll

BACKGROUNDAlthough critical care nurses gain satisfaction from providing compassionate care to patients and patients’ families, the nurses are also at risk for fatigue. The balance between satisfaction and fatigue is considered professional quality of life.OBJECTIVESTo establish the prevalence of compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue in adult, pediatric, and neonatal critical care nurses and to describe potential contributing demographic, unit, and organizational characteristics.METHODSIn a cross-sectional design, nurses were surveyed by using a demographic questionnaire and the Professional Quality of Life Scale to measure levels of compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction.RESULTSNurses (n = 221) reported significant differences in compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue on the basis of sex, age, educational level, unit, acuity, change in nursing management, and major systems change.CONCLUSIONSUnderstanding the elements of professional quality of life can have a positive effect on work environment. The relationship between professional quality of life and the standards for a healthy work environment requires further investigation. Once this relationship is fully understood, interventions to improve this balance can be developed and tested.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-304
Author(s):  
Julie Highfield ◽  
Jack Parry-Jones

Background Critical care is widely perceived, both within and outside of the speciality, as unremitting and emotionally burdensome. There is a perception of a higher risk to medical staff of burnout than other specialities. Critical care also has considerable emotional and professional rewards. We sought to examine this balance between emotional reward and stress in UK critical care consultants registered with the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine. Method We conducted a Wellbeing survey of the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine consultant membership utilising the Professional Quality of Life (Pro-QOL) survey tool. The survey was conducted as part of the Annual Workforce Census. Results In sum, 799 members completed the Pro-QOL survey, making this one of the largest surveys of physician wellbeing in critical care medicine. Data were analysed in accordance with the Pro-QOL manual. Conclusions The results demonstrate moderate risk for burnout and secondary traumatic stress, but this is balanced by moderate compassion satisfaction. No association was demonstrated between age, sex, or size of critical care unit worked in. Further follow-up of this consultant group is warranted to better understand risk factors for burnout and for future mitigation of these risk factors whilst also enhancing the positive aspects of working as a consultant in critical care medicine.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marissa Monroe ◽  
Elizabeth Morse ◽  
Joseph M. Price

Background Professional quality of life is the quality a person feels in relation to work. For critical care nurses, it is composed of compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue. Professional quality of life is affected by work environment. The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN) has identified 6 standards for a healthy work environment. Objective To explore which of the AACN healthy work environment standards have the strongest impact on professional quality of life in critical care nurses. Methods In an exploratory, cross-sectional survey of nurses working in 4 adult critical care units of a single health care facility, professional quality of life was assessed using the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL), and work environment was evaluated using the AACN Healthy Work Environment Assessment Tool. Results Participants reported compassion satisfaction and burnout levels as average and secondary traumatic stress levels as high. The composite average for all 6 AACN healthy work environment standards was good. A multiple regression analysis revealed true collaboration, effective decision-making, and authentic leadership as significant predictors of compassion satisfaction. Authentic leadership was the only predictor of burnout. Appropriate staffing, meaningful recognition, and authentic leadership were predictors of secondary traumatic stress. Conclusion Authentic leadership is the strongest predictor of compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress. Therefore, improving leadership should be a priority in intensive care units seeking to improve nurses’ professional quality of life.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Quartiroli ◽  
Christopher R. D. Wagstaff ◽  
Edward F. Etzel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document