De invloed van het gehalte aan afslibbare delen en andere factoren op de optimale pH van kleigrond

Een overzicht van de betekenis van verschillen in kalktoestand voor de opbrengst van de gewassen op kleigrond in Nederland is in 1948 gegeven door CASTENMILLER. Dit overzicht heeft betrekking op ca. 80 oogstjaren van in totaal 25 proefvelden. Van die 80 oogstjaren zijn er 44 afkomstig van proeven in de provincie Groningen, 16 in Zeeland en 20 in de rest van het land. Daar de gegevens op verschillende gewassen betrekking hebben, oordeelt CASTENMILLER dat op grond hiervan slechts beperkte conclusies kunnen worden getrokken. Daar er behoefte bestaat aan verdere detaillering en versteviging van het bekalkingsadvies voor kleigrond, werden de na 1946 verkregen gegevens verzameld en samengevat. In dit verslag worden de resultaten van deze studie beschreven

Assessing the Well-Being at Work of Nurses and Doctors in Hospitals:Protocol for a Scoping Review of Monitoring Instruments

BACKGROUND: Well-being at work can be defined as "creating an environment to promote a state of contentment which allows an employee to flourish and achieve their full potential for the benefit of themselves and their organisation." In the health care context, well-being at work of nurses and doctors is important for good patient care. Moreover, it is strongly associated with individual- and organization-level consequences. Relevant literature presents models and concepts of physical, mental, and social well-being. This study uses the 6 elements of the job demands-resources (JD-R) model to interpret well-being at work (job demands, job resources, personal resources, leadership, well-being, and outcomes) as part of a Netherlands Federation of University Medical Hospitals program to find ways to improve and monitor health care professionals' well-being in Dutch hospitals. Many instruments exist to measure well-being at work in terms of population, setting, and other aspects. An overview of available and eligible instruments assessing and monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors is currently missing.OBJECTIVE: We will perform a scoping review aiming to provide an overview of validated instruments assessing and monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors at work.METHODS: We will perform a search of published literature in the following databases: Medline, Embase, and CINAHL. Studies will be eligible if they (1) assess well-being at work of nurses and doctors employed in hospitals; (2) describe an evaluation of an instrument or review an instrument; (3) measure well-being at work or aspects of well-being at work according to the elements of the JD-R model, and (4) were published in English from 2011 onwards. Title/abstract screening according to the eligibility criteria will be followed by full-text screening. Data extraction of included studies will be conducted by 3 reviewers independently. Reviewers will use standardized data extraction forms that include study characteristics, sample characteristics, measurement instrument details, and psychometric properties. The analysis will be descriptive. When synthesizing the data, a distinction will be made between comprehensive instruments and common instruments.RESULTS: This scoping review identifies instruments that have been developed and validated for monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors at work. Studies were searched between September and December 2021 and screened between December 2021 and May 2022. A total of 739 studies were included.CONCLUSIONS: Timely screening of well-being at work may be beneficial for individual health care workers, the organization, and patients. There is often a substantial gap and mismatch between employer perceptions of well-being and well-being interventions. It is important to develop and implement suitable interventions adapted to the needs of nurses and doctors and their health or other problems. Well-being screening should be timely to gain insight into these needs and problems. Moreover, to determine the effectiveness of well-being interventions, measurement is mandatory. The results will be critical for organizations to select a monitoring instrument that best fits the needs of employees and organizations.INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43692.</p

Prioritising nurses' and doctors' health at work:a scoping review of monitoring instruments

OBJECTIVE: Nurses' and doctors' health at work is crucial for their overall performance and the quality of care they provide. The Jobs Demands Resources (JD-R) model offers a framework for health at work, encompassing 'job demands', 'job resources', 'personal resources', 'leadership', 'well-being' and 'outcomes'. While various instruments exist to measure health, an overview of instruments specifically designed for assessing nurses and doctors health is currently missing. This study provides a comprehensive overview of available health instruments specifically developed and validated for healthcare professionals in hospital care. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies assessing the health of nurses and/or doctors in hospitals using or evaluating instruments based on the JD-R model, published between January 2011 and January 2024, excluding student-exclusive samples. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted data on study and sample characteristics, as well as details of the measurement instruments, including main and subconstructs. Instruments were categorised based on the JD-R model domains. Descriptive analysis and data visualisation were performed using Excel and Python. RESULTS: We included 1204 studies, reporting 986 unique instruments. We identified 32 comprehensive instruments suitable for broad health screening, measuring four or more of the JD-R model domains. Additionally, we identified instruments focusing on specific domains for targeted screening needs. Furthermore, we present frequently reported instruments assumed to be extensively evaluated, user-friendly, accessible and available in multiple languages. CONCLUSIONS: Health at work cannot be determined by a single instrument alone, underscoring the multidimensional nature of workplace health. Alternatively, organisations should select instruments based on domains most relevant and applicable to their context. This approach ensures a more comprehensive assessment of health at work.</p

Experienced career perspectives of nursing students and their supervisors in learning departments:a qualitative study

Due to the nursing shortage, positive work environments are needed to retain (student) nurses. More and attractive internships for students need to be ensured. In order to provide more internship places learning departments were developed, which are characterized by a buddy system and supervisors who coaches at least two students during a shift. Gaining knowledge about career perspectives and job satisfaction is essential within the context of learning departments, as both will contribute to quality and safety of care and will support lifelong learning. The current study aimed to investigate how nurses and nursing students working and learning in learning departments experience preconditions for career opportunities

Assessing the Well-Being at Work of Nurses and Doctors in Hospitals: Protocol for a Scoping Review of Monitoring Instruments

Background: Well-being at work can be defined as “creating an environment to promote a state of contentment which allows an employee to flourish and achieve their full potential for the benefit of themselves and their organisation.” In the health care context, well-being at work of nurses and doctors is important for good patient care. Moreover, it is strongly associated with individual- and organization-level consequences. Relevant literature presents models and concepts of physical, mental, and social well-being. This study uses the 6 elements of the job demands-resources (JD-R) model to interpret well-being at work (job demands, job resources, personal resources, leadership, well-being, and outcomes) as part of a Netherlands Federation of University Medical Hospitals program to find ways to improve and monitor health care professionals’ well-being in Dutch hospitals. Many instruments exist to measure well-being at work in terms of population, setting, and other aspects. An overview of available and eligible instruments assessing and monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors is currently missing. Objective: We will perform a scoping review aiming to provide an overview of validated instruments assessing and monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors at work. Methods: We will perform a search of published literature in the following databases: Medline, Embase, and CINAHL. Studies will be eligible if they (1) assess well-being at work of nurses and doctors employed in hospitals; (2) describe an evaluation of an instrument or review an instrument; (3) measure well-being at work or aspects of well-being at work according to the elements of the JD-R model, and (4) were published in English from 2011 onwards. Title/abstract screening according to the eligibility criteria will be followed by full-text screening. Data extraction of included studies will be conducted by 3 reviewers independently. Reviewers will use standardized data extraction forms that include study characteristics, sample characteristics, measurement instrument details, and psychometric properties. The analysis will be descriptive. When synthesizing the data, a distinction will be made between comprehensive instruments and common instruments. Results: This scoping review identifies instruments that have been developed and validated for monitoring the well-being of nurses and doctors at work. Studies were searched between September and December 2021 and screened between December 2021 and May 2022. A total of 739 studies were included. Conclusions: Timely screening of well-being at work may be beneficial for individual health care workers, the organization, and patients. There is often a substantial gap and mismatch between employer perceptions of well-being and well-being interventions. It is important to develop and implement suitable interventions adapted to the needs of nurses and doctors and their health or other problems. Well-being screening should be timely to gain insight into these needs and problems. Moreover, to determine the effectiveness of well-being interventions, measurement is mandatory. The results will be critical for organizations to select a monitoring instrument that best fits the needs of employees and organizations

Prioritising nurses' and doctors' health at work: a scoping review of monitoring instruments

OBJECTIVE: Nurses' and doctors' health at work is crucial for their overall performance and the quality of care they provide. The Jobs Demands Resources (JD-R) model offers a framework for health at work, encompassing 'job demands', 'job resources', 'personal resources', 'leadership', 'well-being' and 'outcomes'. While various instruments exist to measure health, an overview of instruments specifically designed for assessing nurses and doctors health is currently missing. This study provides a comprehensive overview of available health instruments specifically developed and validated for healthcare professionals in hospital care. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies assessing the health of nurses and/or doctors in hospitals using or evaluating instruments based on the JD-R model, published between January 2011 and January 2024, excluding student-exclusive samples. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted data on study and sample characteristics, as well as details of the measurement instruments, including main and subconstructs. Instruments were categorised based on the JD-R model domains. Descriptive analysis and data visualisation were performed using Excel and Python. RESULTS: We included 1204 studies, reporting 986 unique instruments. We identified 32 comprehensive instruments suitable for broad health screening, measuring four or more of the JD-R model domains. Additionally, we identified instruments focusing on specific domains for targeted screening needs. Furthermore, we present frequently reported instruments assumed to be extensively evaluated, user-friendly, accessible and available in multiple languages. CONCLUSIONS: Health at work cannot be determined by a single instrument alone, underscoring the multidimensional nature of workplace health. Alternatively, organisations should select instruments based on domains most relevant and applicable to their context. This approach ensures a more comprehensive assessment of health at work