Nurses’ Satisfaction With Patient Room Lighting Conditions: A Study of Nurses in Four Hospitals With Differences in the Environment of Care

Abstract

Purpose: The present study aims to contribute to current knowledge about nurses’ perceived importance of lighting in patient rooms and to compare these perceptions across different ages, work shifts, (day and night), and environments of care (traditional and contemporary). Background: Creating an environment of care in patient rooms that successfully balances energy efficiency concerns with the holistic needs of patients, families, and caregivers poses a major challenge for future lighting systems. This study adds to a growing evidence base on the effects of lighting on nurses’ job performance, job satisfaction, and overall perceptions of the environment. Method: Survey responses from 138 participants working in medical–surgical units in four hospitals were analyzed using a mixed-methods approach, with three of the hospitals having lighting systems characterized as providing a traditional environment of care (TEC) and the other hospital having lighting systems characterized as providing a contemporary environment of care (CEC). Results: No significant differences were found based on age or work shift, but several significant differences were found between participants working in the hospital with a CEC and those working in hospitals with a TEC. Participants from the hospital with a CEC lighting system consistently reported higher lighting quality, fewer patient complaints, and less need for supplemental lighting than the participants from the three hospitals with TEC lighting systems. Conclusion: The results of this study provide evidence that innovative lighting approaches and technologies are worth considering as an investment by hospital administrators looking to improve perceptions of the patient room environment.

Lighting Control in Patient Rooms: Understanding Nurses’ Perceptions of Hospital Lighting Using Qualitative Methods

“…Participants were 138 med-surg employees (128 females, 10 males) working in the four hospitals described above (see Davis et al, 2020). Of these, 130 self-identified their position as a “nurse,” and the remaining eight self-identified as a “certified nursing assistant.” Thirty-nine participants worked in Hospital A, 39 worked in Hospital B, and 20 in Hospital C. Thus, 98 participants worked under a traditional environment of care system, and 40 participants worked under a contemporary environment of care system in Hospital D. The breakdown of participants’ ages for each hospital is shown in Table 1.…”

“…These results suggest that while participants desire increased light levels (and control over the light level) in patient rooms to do their job efficiently and well, they also perceive that, for patients to experience satisfaction, more control over the light level, possibly through dimming, should be implemented into patient room design. Interestingly, Davis et al (2020) found that these same nurses reported strong preferences for higher light levels, especially at the patient's bedside. The nuanced results of the qualitative data collected in the present study underscore that the preferences (and the perceptions of preferences) of different user populations remain a challenge to investigate comprehensively without a purposive mixedmethods research design.…”

“…As described in Davis et al (2020), in 2015, nursing staff working in four hospitals in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States were invited to participate in this research. Three of these hospitals (Hospitals A, B, and C) had a lighting framework installed in their med-surg units typical of older hospitals with a traditional environment of care.…”

“…The research protocol was approved by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Institutional Review Board, scope number 22475. Davis et al (2020) report only the results of quantitative aspects of the questionnaire along with some qualitative data associated with the quantitative items relevant to that article. In comparison, the present work reports only on additional open-ended items that were not analyzed in relation to research questions addressed in Davis et al (2020).…”

“…The present article also differs from previously reported data in its methodological approach and reporting. For example, Davis et al (2020) explored primarily quantitative results from a questionnaire measuring the environmental perceptions of med-surg nursing staff working in patient rooms at four hospitals (i.e., Hospitals A, B, C, and D; see Site Details section). In contrast, the present research uses a qualitative methodology to examine unique, open-ended questionnaire items.…”