Research conducted by the Research Group Study Success indicates that many students experience performance pressure. In addition, we’ve noticed an increase in performance pressure in recent years. A little bit of performance pressure can be a good thing: it can facilitate concentration or hitting your deadlines. Are you feeling pressured over extensive periods of time, or are you experiencing stress, lack of sleep, or decreased concentration due to concerns about delivering on performance? Then it is probably a good plan to spring into action. With this info sheet we will explain what performance pressure entails, what causes it, and we will offer suggestions on how to handle performance pressure.
DOCUMENT
The literature on how organizations respond to institutional pressure has shown that the individual decision-makers’ interpretation of institutional pressure played an important role in developing organizational responses. However, it has paid less attention to how this interpretation ultimately contributes to their range of organizational decisions when responding to the same institutional pressure. We address this gap by interviewing board members of U.S. and Dutch hospitals involved in adopting best practices regarding board evaluation. We found four qualitatively different cognitive frames that board members relied on to interpret institutional pressure, and which shaped their organizational response. We contribute to the literature on organizational response to institutional pressure by empirically investigating how decision-makers interpret institutional pressure, by suggesting prior experience and role definition as moderating factors of multidimensional cognitive frames, and by showing how these cognitive frames influence board members’ response to the same institutional pressure.
DOCUMENT
Background: The emphasis on impact factors and the quantity of publications intensifies competition between researchers. This competition was traditionally considered an incentive to produce high-quality work, but there are unwanted side-effects of this competition like publication pressure. To measure the effect of publication pressure on researchers, the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) was developed. Upon using the PPQ, some issues came to light that motivated a revision.Method: We constructed two new subscales based on work stress models using the facet method. We administered the revised PPQ (PPQr) to a convenience sample together with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and the Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ). To assess which items best measured publication pressure, we carried out a principal component analysis (PCA). Reliability was sufficient when Cronbach's alpha > 0.7. Finally, we administered the PPQr in a larger, independent sample of researchers to check the reliability of the revised version.Results: Three components were identified as 'stress', 'attitude', and 'resources'. We selected 3 × 6 = 18 items with high loadings in the three-component solution. Based on the convenience sample, Cronbach's alphas were 0.83 for stress, 0.80 for attitude, and 0.76 for resources. We checked the validity of the PPQr by inspecting the correlations with the MBI and the WDQ. Stress correlated 0.62 with MBI's emotional exhaustion. Resources correlated 0.50 with relevant WDQ subscales. To assess the internal structure of the PPQr in the independent reliability sample, we conducted the principal component analysis. The three-component solution explains 50% of the variance. Cronbach's alphas were 0.80, 0.78, and 0.75 for stress, attitude, and resources, respectively.Conclusion: We conclude that the PPQr is a valid and reliable instrument to measure publication pressure in academic researchers from all disciplinary fields. The PPQr strongly relates to burnout and could also be beneficial for policy makers and research institutions to assess the degree of publication pressure in their institute.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: Pressure ulcers are a high cost, high volume issue for health and medical care providers, having a detrimental effect on patients and relatives. Pressure ulcer prevention is widely covered in the literature, but little has been published regarding the risk to patients in the radiographical setting. Thisreview of the current literature is to identify findings relevant to radiographical context.Methods: Literature searching was performed using Science Direct and Medline databases. The search was limited to articles published in the last ten years to remain current and excluded studies containing participants less than 17 years of age. In total 14 studies were acquired; three were excluded as they were not relevant. The remaining 11 studies were compared and reviewed.Discussion: Eight of the studies used ‘healthy’ participants and three used symptomatic participants. Nine studies explored interface pressure with a range of pressure mat technologies, two studies measured shear (MRI finite element modelling, and a non-invasive instrument), and one looked at blood flow and haemoglobin oxygenation. A range of surfaces were considered from trauma, nursing and surgical backgrounds for their ability to reduce pressure including standard mattresses, high specification mattresses, rigid and soft layer spine boards, various overlays (gel, air filled, foam).Conclusion: The current literature is not appropriate for the radiographic patient and cannot be extrapolated to a radiologic context. Sufficient evidence is presented in this review to support the need for further work specific to radiography in order to minimise the development of PU in at risk patients.
DOCUMENT
IntroductionThe driving pressure (ΔP) has an independent association with outcome in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). INTELLiVENT-Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a closed-loop mode of ventilation that targets the lowest work and force of breathing.AimTo compare transpulmonary and respiratory system ΔP between closed-loop ventilation and conventional pressure controlled ventilation in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS.MethodsSingle-center randomized cross-over clinical trial in patients in the early phase of ARDS. Patients were randomly assigned to start with a 4-h period of closed-loop ventilation or conventional ventilation, after which the alternate ventilation mode was selected. The primary outcome was the transpulmonary ΔP; secondary outcomes included respiratory system ΔP, and other key parameters of ventilation.ResultsThirteen patients were included, and all had fully analyzable data sets. Compared to conventional ventilation, with closed-loop ventilation the median transpulmonary ΔP with was lower (7.0 [5.0–10.0] vs. 10.0 [8.0–11.0] cmH2O, mean difference − 2.5 [95% CI − 2.6 to − 2.1] cmH2O; P = 0.0001). Inspiratory transpulmonary pressure and the respiratory rate were also lower. Tidal volume, however, was higher with closed-loop ventilation, but stayed below generally accepted safety cutoffs in the majority of patients.ConclusionsIn this small physiological study, when compared to conventional pressure controlled ventilation INTELLiVENT-ASV reduced the transpulmonary ΔP in patients in the early phase of moderate-to-severe ARDS. This closed-loop ventilation mode also led to a lower inspiratory transpulmonary pressure and a lower respiratory rate, thereby reducing the intensity of ventilation.Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03211494, July 7, 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03211494?term=airdrop&draw=2&rank=1.
MULTIFILE
Background: The transformation in global demography and the shortage of health care workers require innovation and efficiency in the field of health care. Digital technology can help improve the efficiency of health care. The Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution is an example of digital technology. The system is connected to a hybrid mattress and is able to detect patient movement, based on which the air pump either starts automatically or sends a notification to the app. Barriers to the adoption of the system are unknown, and it is unclear if the solution will be able to support health care workers in their work. Objective: This study aims to gain insight into health care workers’ expectations of factors that could either hamper or support the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare unit connected to a Mercury Advance mattress to help prevent patients from developing pressure injuries in hospitals and long-term care facilities. Methods: We conducted a generic qualitative study from February to December 2022. Interviews were conducted, and a focus group was established using an interview guide of health care workers from both the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Thematic analysis was performed by 2 independent researchers. Results: A total of 14 participants took part in the study: 6 (43%) participants joined the focus group, and 8 (57%) participants took part in the individual interviews. We identified 13 factors based on four themes: (1) factors specifically related to SMARTresponse, (2) vision on innovation, (3) match with health care activities, and (4) materials and resources involved. Signaling function, SMARTresponse as prevention, patient category, representatives, and implementation strategy were identified as facilitators. Perception of patient repositioning, accessibility to pressure injury aids, and connectivity were identified as barriers. Conclusions: Several conditions must be met to enhance the adoption of the Mercury Advance SMARTcare solution, including the engagement of representatives during training and a reliable wireless network. The identified factors can be used to facilitate the implementation process. JMIR Nursing 2024;7:e47992
DOCUMENT
The Co-Design Pressure Cooker was set up to gather knowledge on co-design in product development activities of Small-to-Medium Enterprises(SMEs). This booklet gives an impression of ten projects conducted in the Province of Utrecht, the Netherlands. In these ten projects, a total of 22 companies were involved. 5000 booklets have already been printed in Dutch and handed out to SMEs for knowledge dissemination. We have received ample requests from the international community, which leads us to believe that there is an international audience for the cases conducted and knowledge gathered. This is why we decided to publish an English version of this booklet. The booklet will be followed by a scientific publication on the knowledge gathered for the academic community. Feel free to contact us for more information on this project
DOCUMENT
The number of people who combine work and unpaid care is increasing rapidly as more people need care, public and private care systems are progressively under pressure and more people are required to work for longer. Without adequate support, these working carers may experience detrimental effects on their well-being. To adequately support working carers, it is important to first understand the challenges they face. A scoping review was carried out, using Arksey and O’Malley's framework, to map the challenges of combining work and care and solutions described in the literature to address these challenges. The search included academic and grey literature between 2008 and 2018 and was conducted in April 2018, using electronic academic databases and reference list checks. Ninety-two publications were mapped, and the content analysed thematically. A conceptual framework was derived from the analysis which identified primary challenges (C1), directly resulting from combining work and care, primary solutions (S1) aiming to address these, secondary challenges (C2) resulting from solutions and secondary solutions (S2) aiming to address secondary challenges. Primary challenges were: (a) high and/or competing demands; (b) psychosocial/-emotional stressors; (c) distance; (d) carer's health; (e) returning to work; and (f) financial pressure. This framework serves to help those aiming to support working carers to better understand the challenges they face and those developing solutions for the challenges of combining work and care to consider potential consequences or barriers. Gaps in the literature have been identified and discussed.
DOCUMENT
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
