Arja Häggman-Laitila1,2, Johanna Romppanen1. 1. Department of Nursing Science, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland. 2. Department of Social Services and Health Care, Helsinki, Finland.
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this study was to gather, assess and synthesize current research knowledge on interventions that aimed to improve nurse leaders' well-being at work. BACKGROUND: The research evidence on interventions for nurse leaders' well-being at work has been sporadic and there are a lack of evidence-based recommendations for effective interventions that inform practice, future studies and education. DESIGN: A quantitative systematic review, in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration procedures and the reporting guidance in the PRISMA statement. METHODS: CINAHL, Cochrane, EBSCO, PubMed, PsycInfo and Scopus databases were searched from 2009 - December 2016. The final data consisted of five studies, which were assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The data were summarized narratively. RESULTS: The interventions were mainly concerned with stress management and were targeted at individuals. Four of the five interventions examined produced statistically significant outcomes on well-being at work. CONCLUSIONS: Stress management interventions that included mental exercises were the most successful. Interventions primarily reduced the stress experienced by participants, but the evidence on the stability of these outcomes was poor because of the short follow-up periods. The certainty of evidence was low, indicating that the use of these interventions among nurse leaders might be beneficial. Further studies are needed to provide more reliable recommendations for their use. As the performance of nurse leaders influences organizations, through interpersonal relationships, it is important to pay more attention in the future to the development of organization- and person-directed interventions and their combinations. A structural empowerment approach should also be considered.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to gather, assess and synthesize current research knowledge on interventions that aimed to improve nurse leaders' well-being at work. BACKGROUND: The research evidence on interventions for nurse leaders' well-being at work has been sporadic and there are a lack of evidence-based recommendations for effective interventions that inform practice, future studies and education. DESIGN: A quantitative systematic review, in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration procedures and the reporting guidance in the PRISMA statement. METHODS: CINAHL, Cochrane, EBSCO, PubMed, PsycInfo and Scopus databases were searched from 2009 - December 2016. The final data consisted of five studies, which were assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The data were summarized narratively. RESULTS: The interventions were mainly concerned with stress management and were targeted at individuals. Four of the five interventions examined produced statistically significant outcomes on well-being at work. CONCLUSIONS: Stress management interventions that included mental exercises were the most successful. Interventions primarily reduced the stress experienced by participants, but the evidence on the stability of these outcomes was poor because of the short follow-up periods. The certainty of evidence was low, indicating that the use of these interventions among nurse leaders might be beneficial. Further studies are needed to provide more reliable recommendations for their use. As the performance of nurse leaders influences organizations, through interpersonal relationships, it is important to pay more attention in the future to the development of organization- and person-directed interventions and their combinations. A structural empowerment approach should also be considered.
Authors: Natalia Stanulewicz; Emily Knox; Melanie Narayanasamy; Noureen Shivji; Kamlesh Khunti; Holly Blake Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sabrina Berlanda; Federica de Cordova; Marta Fraizzoli; Monica Pedrazza Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 3.390