The ‘Robust’ roster: exploring the nurse rostering process

Abstract

Roster 'robustness' is determined by the quality of the approved roster and subsequent postapproval demand- and supply-driven changes. Despite evidence that e-rostering can improve roster robustness, many Ward Managers prefer to roster manually. On some wards, rosters are approved, regardless of the number of rule breakages occurring.

Nurse rostering: models and algorithms for theory, practice and integration with other problems

“…This illustrates that the weights chosen by the head nurse do not correspond to the actual priority of constraints according to the In practice, it is common for head nurses to be satisfied after making changes to the generated rosters, even though the overall penalty after such modifications increases [46]. This also suggests that the manually defined constraint weights differ from the perceived importance of constraints.…”

Staff unavailability and safe staffing: are headroom allowances ‘realistic’?

“…The transparency provided by e-rostering systems has enabled unavailability to be examined in greater detail (Drake 2014b), allowing many institutions to define a single, hospital-wide, headroom figure as a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) within their roster policies. However, evidence suggests that headroom can vary by more than 10% from unit-to-unit within the same hospital (Drake 2013).…”

Does longer roster lead‐time reduce temporary staff usage? A regression analysis of e‐rostering data from 77 hospital units

“…Electronic rostering (e‐rostering) offers greater transparency of the roster process (Drake, 2014a) and the opportunity to investigate characteristics of custom and practice such as the assumed relationship between roster approval lead‐time and temporary staff usage. Following a review into hospital productivity, Carter ( p23) notes that: “A firmer grip of e‐rostering will reduce dependency on bank and agency staff.” To this end, Carter () recommends that rosters be approved/published at least 6 weeks in advance of being worked, while, in Australia, the New South Wales Ministry of Health advocate a much shorter minimum lead‐time of 2 weeks (NSW Ministry of Health, ).…”

“…Consequently, the search for cost savings through improved operational productivity has become a major priority (Carter, ). Based on custom and practice, organizations have long assumed a relationship between roster approval lead‐time and roster robustness, as defined by postapproval changes to the roster and levels of temporary staff required (Drake, 2014a).…”