Assessment of the work environment of multidisciplinary hospital staff

Abstract

The four proposed scales appear to measure meaningful aspects of the working environment that are important in determining overall satisfaction with the work environment and are related to quality of care.

Impact of a multifunctional image-guided therapy suite on emergency multiple trauma care

“…In the healthcare setting, the importance of human factors has been realized very late, although conflicts continue to increase with the implementation of new techniques30. The main determinants of satisfaction continue to be discussed, and validated instruments for perceived quality of care are lacking31. Most criticisms of the collaborators in the present study related to episodes of malfunction of the MIGTS, that is, typical problems concerning human–machine and machine–machine interfaces experienced during the introductory period of an innovation32, 33.…”

Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review

“…Other studies applied samples of diverse healthcare professionals [ 54–70 ]. Most studies focused on measuring WE as a total concept [ 36–39 , 41 , 43–45 , 48–56 , 59 , 62 , 68 , 71 , 72 ] despite terming it differently sometimes, e.g. practice environment [ 41 , 43–45 , 49 , 52 , 56 , 68 ], ward environment [ 37 ] or healthy WE [ 39 , 59 , 71 ].…”

“…Sorting and clustering the subscales/items up to consensus resulted in 48 WE elements (see Table 3 and Supplementary File 2). Based on the content comparison, we conclude that 21 instruments measure the environment of clinical inpatient settings [ 36–39 , 41 , 43–45 , 48–56 , 62 , 68 , 71 , 72 ], sharing common features in terms of items and constructs, e.g. multidisciplinary collaboration [ 36–39 , 41 , 44 , 48–51 , 54–56 , 62 , 68 , 72 ], autonomy [ 36 , 38 , 41 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 62 ], informal leadership [ 37 , 39 , 41 , 44 , 48–51 , 56 , 72 ] or supportive management [ 36–39 , 43 , 44 , 48–50 , 52 , 54 , 55 , 62 , 72 ].…”

“…Based on the content comparison, we conclude that 21 instruments measure the environment of clinical inpatient settings [ 36–39 , 41 , 43–45 , 48–56 , 62 , 68 , 71 , 72 ], sharing common features in terms of items and constructs, e.g. multidisciplinary collaboration [ 36–39 , 41 , 44 , 48–51 , 54–56 , 62 , 68 , 72 ], autonomy [ 36 , 38 , 41 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 62 ], informal leadership [ 37 , 39 , 41 , 44 , 48–51 , 56 , 72 ] or supportive management [ 36–39 , 43 , 44 , 48–50 , 52 , 54 , 55 , 62 , 72 ]. Other frequently used constructs and items are staffing adequacy [ 38 , 39 , 45 , 48–50 , 52 , 55 ], workload [ 36 , 43 , 52–54 , 59 , 71 , 72 ] or working conditions [ 37 , 43 , 49 , 53–55 ], and professional development [ 39 , 43 , 48 , 49 , 52–54 , 62 , 71 ...…”

A Case Study Perspective to the Digital Transformation of a Hospital’s Perioperative Process

“…Operationally, a hospital's perioperative process provides surgical care for inpatients and outpatients during preoperative, intraoperative, and immediate post-operative periods. Perioperative surgical care requires teams of multidisciplinary professionals, synchronously or asynchronously, to maneuver within complex, fastpaced, and critical situations-the hospital environment [26]. Accordingly, the perioperative process reflects patient flow, safety, and quality of care as well as stakeholders' satisfaction (e.g., patient, physician, nurse, perioperative staff, and hospital administration).…”