Background Although, moral distress presents a serious problem among critical care nurses in many countries, limited research has been conducted on it. A validated scale has been developed to evaluate moral distress and has enabled cross-cultural comparison for seeking its root causes. Research aims This study aimed to (1) clarify the current status of moral distress among nurses who worked in critical care areas in Japan, (2) compare the moral distress levels among nurses in Japan with previously reported results from the United States (US), and (3) explore the factors associated with moral distress. Research design A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted. Participants and research context We conducted a self-administered questionnaire survey using the Measure of Moral Distress–Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP) among critical care nurses who were randomly selected from hospitals across Japan. The mean differences between the two countries were compared using a Student's t-test with summary statistics. The factors associated with higher levels of moral distress were examined using a multiple regression analysis. Ethical considerations The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Tokyo Medical and Dental University (approval nos. M2018-214 and M2019-045). Results We obtained 955 valid responses from 94 facilities. In Japan, the items with the highest moral distress scores were those related to aggressive/inappropriate treatment. The total MMD-HP score was significantly higher in Japanese nurses compared to US nurses (122.8 ± 70.8 vs 112.3 ± 73.2). Some factors, such as leadership experience, were associated with higher moral distress. Discussion The top root causes of moral distress were similar to potentially inappropriate treatments in both countries. Conclusion This study revealed the factors associated with higher moral distress and its characteristics in each country. These results can be used for reducing moral distress in the future.

Background: Moral distress has various adverse effects on nurses working in critical care. Differences in personal values, and between values and self-perception of behaviour are factors that may cause moral distress. Research aims: The aims of this study were (1) to identify ethical values and self-perception of behaviour of critical care nurses in Japan and (2) to determine the items with a large difference between value and behaviour and the items with a large difference in value from others. Research design: A nationwide, cross-sectional study was conducted. Participants and research context: We developed a self-administered questionnaire with 28 items, which was completed by 1014 critical care nurses in Japan. The difference between value and self-perception of behaviour was calculated from the score of each value item minus the score of each self-perception of behaviour item. The size of the difference in value from the others was judged by the standard deviation of each item. Ethical considerations: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Tokyo Medical and Dental University (approval nos. M2018-214, M2019-045). Results: The items with a large difference between value and behaviour sources were related to the working environment and decision-making support. The items with a large difference in value from others were related to hospital management and disclosure of information to patients. Discussion: Improving the working environment for nurses is important for reducing moral distress. Nurses are faced with a variety of choices, including advocating for patients and protecting the fair distribution of medical resources, and each nurse’s priorities might diverge from those of other team members, which can lead to conflict within the team. Conclusion: This study revealed items with particularly high risks of moral distress for nurses. The results provide foundational information that can guide the development of strategies to mitigate moral distress.

Aims This study aims to develop and examine the effectiveness of a support program for reducing moral distress of nurses, based on the moral case deliberation methodology, and to study the feasibility of its implementation. Methods Study design was an intervention study with pre/post‐comparison. The support program included a short lecture and three moral case deliberation sessions for nurses working in an acute care hospital. The Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (MMD‐HP) and the Euro‐MCD (Moral Case Deliberation) 2.0 scale were used for pre/post‐comparison, using the Wilcoxon's signed‐rank test. Furthermore, post‐intervention interviews were conducted with consenting participants to determine the reasons for changes in pre/post‐intervention quantitative data. Of the 34 participants, 29 completed the post‐questionnaire and were included in the quantitative data analysis, and 27 were included in the qualitative data analysis. Results The mean MMD‐HP total scores increased from 147.5 ± 61.0 to 159.3 ± 66.7, but not significantly (p = .375). The mean score of moral competence, a sub‐scale of the Euro‐MCD 2.0, increased significantly from 15.4 ± 2.4 to 16.4 ± 2.8 after the intervention (p = .036). A qualitative analysis revealed increased moral sensitivity to ethically difficult situations and improved analytical skills as the reasons for change in scores pre/post‐intervention. Conclusion The results of the qualitative analysis suggested the effectiveness of the intervention. The moral distress score increased, although not significantly, and moral competence also increased, suggesting the participants' values changed after the intervention. It was found that the support program using MCD is expected to improve participants' moral competence.