Nurse staffing levels revisited: a consideration of key issues in nurse staffing levels and skill mix research.

AIM: This paper revisits the published evidence relating to how nurse staffing levels impact on patient, nurse and service outcomes and considers the implications of this body of research for nurse managers in their quest to determine optimum nursing numbers. BACKGROUND: Within the context of the recognized global nursing shortage and particular local pressures within international health services, questions of appropriate nurse staffing levels and skill mix are once again becoming increasingly important. It would seem that the determination of optimum nurse staffing levels and skill mix is a central issue in relation to health service governance, service user involvement, as well as in the recruitment, retention and well-being of nursing staff across the service sectors. METHODS: A review of published evidence was carried out, applying key principles of the systematic method, in order to facilitate the identification of current factors and issues in nurse staffing levels research. The review did not seek to address a specific research question. The search covered 10 years from 1998 to 2008 and identified more than 500 relevant papers, giving a wide international perspective. KEY ISSUES: The majority of research in the field relates to the acute service sector and there are considerable similarities in issues that transcend international boundaries. Much of the research focuses on the impact on patients and nurses of 'poor' nurse staffing levels. More recent studies have explored the impact of nurse staffing levels on the service organization itself. However, while there may be an association between models of nurse staffing and outcomes, there is insufficient evidence to establish a causal relationship between these factors. In this context it is perhaps time to reconsider how nursing outcomes are defined and measured. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT AND CONCLUSION: Nurse managers, commissioners of services and workforce planners need to be cognisant of key issues and analyses in the consideration of nurse staffing levels. Not least of these is the need for a healthy degree of caution regarding the supposed objectivity, scientific basis, or evidence base, for rational calculation of optimum nurse staffing levels

Thriving at work: Toward its measurement, construct validation, and theoretical refinement

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90225/1/job756.pd

Methodological issues associated with collecting sensitive information over the telephone - experience from an Australian non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) prevalence study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Collecting population data on sensitive issues such as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is problematic. Case note audits or hospital/clinic based presentations only record severe cases and do not distinguish between suicidal and non-suicidal intent. Community surveys have largely been limited to school and university students, resulting in little much needed population-based data on NSSI. Collecting these data via a large scale population survey presents challenges to survey methodologists. This paper addresses the methodological issues associated with collecting this type of data via CATI.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An Australia-wide population survey was funded by the Australian Government to determine prevalence estimates of NSSI and associations, predictors, relationships to suicide attempts and suicide ideation, and outcomes. Computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) on a random sample of the Australian population aged 10+ years of age from randomly selected households, was undertaken.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, from 31,216 eligible households, 12,006 interviews were undertaken (response rate 38.5%). The 4-week prevalence of NSSI was 1.1% (95% ci 0.9-1.3%) and lifetime prevalence was 8.1% (95% ci 7.6-8.6).</p> <p>Methodological concerns and challenges in regard to collection of these data included extensive interviewer training and post interview counselling. Ethical considerations, especially with children as young as 10 years of age being asked sensitive questions, were addressed prior to data collection. The solution required a large amount of information to be sent to each selected household prior to the telephone interview which contributed to a lower than expected response rate. Non-coverage error caused by the population of interest being highly mobile, homeless or institutionalised was also a suspected issue in this low prevalence condition. In many circumstances the numbers missing from the sampling frame are small enough to not cause worry, especially when compared with the population as a whole, but within the population of interest to us, we believe that the most likely direction of bias is towards an underestimation of our prevalence estimates.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Collecting valid and reliable data is a paramount concern of health researchers and survey research methodologists. The challenge is to design cost-effective studies especially those associated with low-prevalence issues, and to balance time and convenience against validity, reliability, sampling, coverage, non-response and measurement error issues.</p