Nurse Staffing Levels and Patient-Reported Missed Nursing Care

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 306-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beverly Waller Dabney ◽  
Beatrice J. Kalisch
2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. J. Kalisch ◽  
D. Tschannen ◽  
K. H. Lee

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.-H. Cho ◽  
Y.-S. Kim ◽  
K.N. Yeon ◽  
S.-J. You ◽  
I.D. Lee

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e051133
Author(s):  
Vera Winter ◽  
Karina Dietermann ◽  
Udo Schneider ◽  
Jonas Schreyögg

ObjectiveTo examine the impact of nurse staffing on patient-perceived quality of nursing care. We differentiate nurse staffing levels and nursing skill mix as two facets of nurse staffing and use a multidimensional instrument for patient-perceived quality of nursing care. We investigate non-linear and interaction effects.SettingThe study setting was 3458 hospital units in 1017 hospitals in Germany.ParticipantsWe contacted 212 554 patients discharged from non-paediatric, non-intensive and non-psychiatric hospital units who stayed at least two nights in the hospital between January and October 2019. Of those, 30 174 responded, yielding a response rate of 14.2%. Our sample included only those patients. After excluding extreme values for our nurse staffing variables and removing observations with missing values, our final sample comprised 28 136 patients ranging from 18 to 97 years of age (average: 61.12 years) who had been discharged from 3458 distinct hospital units in 1017 hospitals.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPatient-perceived quality of nursing care (general nursing care, guidance provided by nurses, and patient loyalty to the hospital).ResultsFor all three dimensions of patient-perceived quality of nursing care, we found that they significantly decreased as (1) nurse staffing levels decreased (with decreasing marginal effects) and (2) the proportion of assistant nurses in a hospital unit increased. The association between nurse staffing levels and quality of nursing care was more pronounced among patients who were less clinically complex, were admitted to smaller hospitals or were admitted to medical units.ConclusionsOur results indicate that, in addition to nurse staffing levels, nursing skill mix is crucial for providing the best possible quality of nursing care from the patient perspective and both should be considered when designing policies such as minimum staffing regulations to improve the quality of nursing care in hospitals.


Author(s):  
Xiaowen Zhu ◽  
Jing Zheng ◽  
Ke Liu ◽  
Liming You

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to test the mediation effect of rationing of nursing care (RONC) and the relationship this has between nurse staffing and patient outcomes. Methods: The analytic sample included 7802 nurse surveys and 5430 patient surveys. Three patient outcome indicators, nurse staffing, RONC, and confounding factors were considered in the model pathways. Results: The hypothesized model was shown to be statistically significant. In the model, nurses who were in the units with lower nurse-to-patient ratios reported higher scores on RONC, which meant that an increased level of withheld nursing care or a failure to carry out nursing duties was apparent. Nurses who reported a higher score on RONC, scored poorly on the quality assessment and were more frequently involved in patient adverse events. Nurse staffing influenced quality assessments and patient adverse events through RONC. In units with poorer nurse-reported quality assessments or more frequently patient adverse events, patient-reported dissatisfaction scores were higher. Conclusions: The results suggest that a lack of nurse staffing leads to RONC, which leads to poorer patient outcomes. These results are seen when considering the evaluations completed by both nurses and patients. The relationship between staffing numbers and patient outcomes explains the mediating role of RONC.


2018 ◽  
pp. 465-488
Author(s):  
Alberto Lucchini ◽  
Michele Pirovano ◽  
Christian De Felippis ◽  
Irene Comisso

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sung-Hyun Cho ◽  
Barbara A. Mark ◽  
George Knafl ◽  
Hyoung Eun Chang ◽  
Hyo-Jeong Yoon

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 415-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrice J. Kalisch ◽  
Boqin Xie ◽  
Beverly Waller Dabney

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (16) ◽  
pp. 1-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Griffiths ◽  
Christina Saville ◽  
Jane E Ball ◽  
Rosemary Chable ◽  
Andrew Dimech ◽  
...  

Background The Safer Nursing Care Tool is a system designed to guide decisions about nurse staffing requirements on hospital wards, in particular the number of nurses to employ (establishment). The Safer Nursing Care Tool is widely used in English hospitals but there is a lack of evidence about how effective and cost-effective nurse staffing tools are at providing the staffing levels needed for safe and quality patient care. Objectives To determine whether or not the Safer Nursing Care Tool corresponds to professional judgement, to assess a range of options for using the Safer Nursing Care Tool and to model the costs and consequences of various ward staffing policies based on Safer Nursing Care Tool acuity/dependency measure. Design This was an observational study on medical/surgical wards in four NHS hospital trusts using regression, computer simulations and economic modelling. We compared the effects and costs of a ‘high’ establishment (set to meet demand on 90% of days), the ‘standard’ (mean-based) establishment and a ‘flexible (low)’ establishment (80% of the mean) providing a core staff group that would be sufficient on days of low demand, with flexible staff re-deployed/hired to meet fluctuations in demand. Setting Medical/surgical wards in four NHS hospital trusts. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures were professional judgement of staffing adequacy and reports of omissions in care, shifts staffed more than 15% below the measured requirement, cost per patient-day and cost per life saved. Data sources The data sources were hospital administrative systems, staff reports and national reference costs. Results In total, 81 wards participated (85% response rate), with data linking Safer Nursing Care Tool ratings and staffing levels for 26,362 wards × days (96% response rate). According to Safer Nursing Care Tool measures, 26% of all ward-days were understaffed by ≥ 15%. Nurses reported that they had enough staff to provide quality care on 78% of shifts. When using the Safer Nursing Care Tool to set establishments, on average 60 days of observation would be needed for a 95% confidence interval spanning 1 whole-time equivalent either side of the mean. Staffing levels below the daily requirement estimated using the Safer Nursing Care Tool were associated with lower odds of nurses reporting ‘enough staff for quality’ and more reports of missed nursing care. However, the relationship was effectively linear, with staffing above the recommended level associated with further improvements. In simulation experiments, ‘flexible (low)’ establishments led to high rates of understaffing and adverse outcomes, even when temporary staff were readily available. Cost savings were small when high temporary staff availability was assumed. ‘High’ establishments were associated with substantial reductions in understaffing and improved outcomes but higher costs, although, under most assumptions, the cost per life saved was considerably less than £30,000. Limitations This was an observational study. Outcomes of staffing establishments are simulated. Conclusions Understanding the effect on wards of variability of workload is important when planning staffing levels. The Safer Nursing Care Tool correlates with professional judgement but does not identify optimal staffing levels. Employing more permanent staff than recommended by the Safer Nursing Care Tool guidelines, meeting demand most days, could be cost-effective. Apparent cost savings from ‘flexible (low)’ establishments are achieved largely by below-adequate staffing. Cost savings are eroded under the conditions of high temporary staff availability that are required to make such policies function. Future work Research is needed to identify cut-off points for required staffing. Prospective studies measuring patient outcomes and comparing the results of different systems are feasible. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12307968. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document