Background The global nursing shortages exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a drastic reorganization in nursing practices. Work routines, the composition of teams and subsequently mundane nursing practices were all altered to sustain the accessibility and quality of care. These dramatic changes demanded a reshaping of the nurses’ work environment. The aim of this study was to explore how nurses reshaped their work environment in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A descriptive study comprising 26 semi-structured interviews conducted in a large Dutch teaching hospital between June and September 2020. Participants were nurses (including intensive care unit nurses), outpatient clinic assistants, nurse managers, and management (including one member of the Nurse Practice Council). The interviews were analysed with open, axial, and selective coding. Results We identified five themes: 1) the Nursing Staff Deployment Plan created new micro-teams with complementary roles to meet the care needs of COVID-19 infected patients; 2) nurse-led adaptations effectively managed the increased workload, thereby ensuring the quality of care; 3) continuous professional development ensured adequate competence levels for all roles; 4) interprofessional collaboration resulted in experienced solidarity, a positive atmosphere, and increased autonomy for nurses; and, 5) supportive managers reduced nurses’ stress and improved work conditions. Conclusions This study showed that nurses positively reshaped their work environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. They contributed to innovative solutions in an environment of equal interprofessional collaboration, which led to greater respect for their knowledge and competencies, enhanced their autonomy and improved management support.
LINK
Background: Non-technical errors, such as insufficient communication or leadership, are a major cause of medical failures during trauma resuscitation. Research on staffing variation among trauma teams on teamwork is still in their infancy. In this study, the extent of variation in trauma team staffing was assessed. Our hypothesis was that there would be a high variation in trauma team staffing. Methods: Trauma team composition of consecutive resuscitations of injured patients were evaluated using videos. All trauma team members that where part of a trauma team during a trauma resuscitation were identified and classified during a one-week period. Other outcomes were number of unique team members, number of new team members following the previous resuscitation and new team members following the previous resuscitation in the same shift (Day, Evening, Night). Results: All thirty-two analyzed resuscitations had a unique trauma team composition and 101 unique members were involved. A mean of 5.71 (SD 2.57) new members in teams of consecutive trauma resuscitations was found, which was two-third of the trauma team. Mean team members present during trauma resuscitation was 8.38 (SD 1.43). Most variation in staffing was among nurses (32 unique members), radiology technicians (22 unique members) and anesthetists (19 unique members). The least variation was among trauma surgeons (3 unique members) and ER physicians (3 unique members). Conclusion: We found an extremely high variation in trauma team staffing during thirty-two consecutive resuscitations at our level one trauma center which is incorporated in an academic teaching hospital. Further research is required to explore and prevent potential negative effects of staffing variation in trauma teams on teamwork, processes and patient related outcomes.
Due to fast and unpredictable developments, professional education is challenged with being responsive, which demands a rethinking of conventional curriculum development approaches. Yet, literature on curriculum development falls short in terms of recognising how to react rapidly and adequately to these new developments. This study focuses on curriculum development initiatives at the school level in a Dutch university of applied sciences. Open interviews were held with 29 curriculum developers to explore how they define and give substance to developing curricula for new, changing or unpredictable professions. These 29 participants were involved in seven curriculum development trajectories. Four themes were detected: (1) curriculum developers are in favour of open, flexible and authentic curricula; (2) the context in which the curriculum development takes place and the different roles and responsibilities of curriculum developers are challenging; (3) curriculum developers feel insufficiently equipped to carry out their tasks; and (4) involving stakeholders is necessary but results in a “viscous” social–political process. Responsive curriculum development requires a great deal of flexibility and adaptability from curriculum developers. Yet, in our study, “institutional concrete” is found to severely hinder responsive curriculum development processes. To be responsive, such processes need to be supported and institutional barriers need to be removed.
