Magnetism and the Nursing Workforce

Messmer, Patricia R.; Turkel, Marian C.

doi:10.1891/0739-6686.28.233

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Magnet status is a product of organizational commitment to creating and sustaining a hospital environment that ensures high‐quality nursing care. Magnet hospitals are distinguished by their commitment to fostering an organizational culture that is supportive of nursing staff and a work environment that provides the resources, structures, and governance that encourage nurse development and empowerment and interdisciplinary collaboration . While we lack data on hospital leadership and culture, Magnet status is “steadfast proof” of excellence in patient care as reflected in organizational transformational leadership, exemplary practice environment, and quality improvement…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospitalists staffing levels and hospital performance

Al‐Amin

2019

Health Services Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

| INTRODUC TI ONUnderstanding appropriate staffing levels and skill mix is an essential prerequisite in the quest for better quality, patient safety, patient experience, and efficiency. Most of the literature on staffing levels has focused on the nursing staff. Registered nurse (RN) staffing levels are associated with lower readmission rates, 1 lower mortality rates, 2 lower hospital-acquired infections rates, 3 and higher patient satisfaction. 4 Kane et al performed a meta-analysis on RN staffing levels and concluded that higher RN staffing levels are associated with better patient outcomes and quality. 5 Little, however, is known on the association between physician staffing Abstract Objective (or Study Question): To examine the association between hospitalists staffing levels and contract type with CMS Total Performance Score (TPS). Data Sources/Study Setting: Total performance scores were obtained from CMS, hospital-level data from the 2015 American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database, and unemployment rates from the Area Resource Health File. Study Design: We used cluster analysis to classify hospitals based on the distribution of various hospitalist contracts, and we used regression analysis to examine the association between TPS and hospitalist staffing levels and contract distributions. Hospital-level predictors included hospitalists staffing levels, RN staffing levels, and Magnet status. Market-level variables were unemployment rates and competition. Principal Findings: Higher staffing levels of employed hospitalists or hospitalists with a group contract are associated with higher TPS (with coefficient estimates of 0.85 and 0.83, respectively, and the same standard error of 0.22). Higher staffing levels of hospitalists under individual contract are negatively associated with TPS (with coefficient estimate of −0.43 and standard error of 0.21). Based on the regression analysis using hospital clusters as independent variables, hospitals with individual contractsor without hospitalists providing care had significantly worse TPS compared to hospitals that predominantly employ hospitalists (with coefficient estimate of −1.80 and standard error of 0.61). Magnet status, RN staffing levels, and small and medium size were positively associated with TPS. Medicare share of inpatient days, teaching status, AMCs, and for-profit and public nonfederal ownership were negatively associated with TPS. Conclusions:Adequate hospitalist staffing level is important for hospitals to achieve better performance. Hospitals need to consider the mix of arrangements or contracts that they have with hospitalists. K E Y W O R D Shospitalists, hospitals, staffing, total performance score, value-based purchasing | 45Health Services Research

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospitalists staffing levels and hospital performance

Al‐Amin

2019

Health Services Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Improving the quality of nursing services is a universal concern. The American Nurses Credentialing Center administers the Magnet Recognition Program—an accreditation programme for hospitals that provide excellent nursing (Messmer & Turkel, 2010). Magnet hospitals are attractive to nurses as is evidenced by high satisfaction and low turnover rates (American Nurses Credentialing Centre, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nurse managers’ perception of governance among Korean nurses

Choi

2021

J Nurs Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim This study aims to ascertain nurse managers’ perception of nurses’ governance and explore their perception of facilitating and hindering factors of shared governance. Background Shared governance has been introduced in nursing as a plan to improve nursing service quality. There is limited understanding about how governance is implemented. Methods A mixed‐methods design was used to elicit Korean nurse managers’ views. Results Quantitative data revealed the level of nurses’ governance perceived by nurse managers as shared governance. However, among the subdomains, ‘control over personnel’ and ‘participation in committee structures’ indicate traditional governance. Analysis of qualitative data identified the factors that facilitate or hinder the subdomains: ‘stifled atmosphere’, ‘nurse manager's encouragement’, ‘lack of opportunity and perception of the given authority’ and ‘flexible organisational structure’. Conclusion Findings from the study can be used to inform shared governance programmes for hospitals. Implications for nursing management Health care organisations, nurse managers and nurses must take action at each level to improve the current nurse governance situation. A flexible organisational culture with opinion windows for participation by nurses is important for shared governance. Supportive leadership of nurse managers and nurse‐directed implementation could advance shared governance.

show abstract

“…Frameworks developed by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC) for the Magnet Recognition Program® and Pathway to Excellence® designations require nurses to engage in the process of incorporating new evidence into practice (ANCC, ). While research has linked these designations to quality and safety outcomes (Drenkard, ; Messmer & Turkel, ), less is known about how ANCC‐designated organizations’ characteristics are linked to greater EBP implementation. To increase understanding, we surveyed nurses employed by Magnet‐designated, Pathway to Excellence‐designated, and non designated facilities within one large healthcare system in the southwest United States on barriers to EBP, EBP ability, desire, and frequency of behaviors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%