TY - JOUR
T1 - Contextually appropriate nurse staffing models
T2 - a realist review protocol
AU - Tate, Kaitlyn
AU - Penconek, Tatiana
AU - Booth, Andrew
AU - Harvey, Gillian
AU - Flynn, Rachel
AU - Lalleman, Pieterbas
AU - Wolbers, Inge
AU - Hoben, Matthias
AU - Estabrooks, Carole A.
AU - Cummings, Greta G.
AU - ReSoNANCE (Realist Synthesis of Nursing in Australia Netherlands Canada and England)
AU - Raymond, Christy
AU - Kitson, Alison
AU - Schoonhoven, Lisette
AU - Ryan, Tony
AU - Doupe, Malcolm
AU - Robertson, Steve
AU - Tod, Angela
AU - Schultz, Tim
AU - Van Oostveen, Catharina J.
AU - Hutchinson, Alison
AU - Chilton, Sean
AU - Gordon, Deb
AU - Villeneuve, Mike
AU - Jackson, Wilma
AU - Stalpers, Dewi
AU - Debbage, Sam
AU - Penconek, Tatiana
AU - Chiu, Patrick
AU - Oster, Candice
AU - Bulto, Lemma
AU - Jones, Katherine
PY - 2024/5/6
Y1 - 2024/5/6
N2 - Introduction Decisions about nurse staffing models are a concern for health systems globally due to workforce retention and well-being challenges. Nurse staffing models range from all Registered Nurse workforce to a mix of differentially educated nurses and aides (regulated and unregulated), such as Licensed Practical or Vocational Nurses and Health Care Aides. Systematic reviews have examined relationships between specific nurse staffing models and client, staff and health system outcomes (eg, mortality, adverse events, retention, healthcare costs), with inconclusive or contradictory results. No evidence has been synthesised and consolidated on how, why and under what contexts certain staffing models produce different outcomes. We aim to describe how we will (1) conduct a realist review to determine how nurse staffing models produce different client, staff and health system outcomes, in which contexts and through what mechanisms and (2) coproduce recommendations with decision-makers to guide future research and implementation of nurse staffing models. Methods and analysis Using an integrated knowledge translation approach with researchers and decision-makers as partners, we are conducting a three-phase realist review. In this protocol, we report on the final two phases of this realist review. We will use Citation tracking, tracing Lead authors, identifying Unpublished materials, Google Scholar searching, Theory tracking, ancestry searching for Early examples, and follow-up of Related projects (CLUSTER) searching, specifically designed for realist searches as the review progresses. We will search empirical evidence to test identified programme theories and engage stakeholders to contextualise findings, finalise programme theories document our search processes as per established realist review methods. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was provided by the Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Alberta (Study ID Pro00100425). We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications, national and international conference presentations, regional briefing sessions, webinars and lay summary.
AB - Introduction Decisions about nurse staffing models are a concern for health systems globally due to workforce retention and well-being challenges. Nurse staffing models range from all Registered Nurse workforce to a mix of differentially educated nurses and aides (regulated and unregulated), such as Licensed Practical or Vocational Nurses and Health Care Aides. Systematic reviews have examined relationships between specific nurse staffing models and client, staff and health system outcomes (eg, mortality, adverse events, retention, healthcare costs), with inconclusive or contradictory results. No evidence has been synthesised and consolidated on how, why and under what contexts certain staffing models produce different outcomes. We aim to describe how we will (1) conduct a realist review to determine how nurse staffing models produce different client, staff and health system outcomes, in which contexts and through what mechanisms and (2) coproduce recommendations with decision-makers to guide future research and implementation of nurse staffing models. Methods and analysis Using an integrated knowledge translation approach with researchers and decision-makers as partners, we are conducting a three-phase realist review. In this protocol, we report on the final two phases of this realist review. We will use Citation tracking, tracing Lead authors, identifying Unpublished materials, Google Scholar searching, Theory tracking, ancestry searching for Early examples, and follow-up of Related projects (CLUSTER) searching, specifically designed for realist searches as the review progresses. We will search empirical evidence to test identified programme theories and engage stakeholders to contextualise findings, finalise programme theories document our search processes as per established realist review methods. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was provided by the Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Alberta (Study ID Pro00100425). We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications, national and international conference presentations, regional briefing sessions, webinars and lay summary.
KW - Nursing
KW - Staffing models
KW - Staff retention
KW - Well-being
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85192634840&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082883
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082883
M3 - Article
C2 - 38719308
AN - SCOPUS:85192634840
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 14
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
IS - 5
M1 - e082883
ER -