| Literature DB >> 35564527 |
Biyun Ye1, Esther Luo2, Jie Zhang1, Xuelei Chen1, Jingping Zhang1.
Abstract
Moral sensitivity helps individuals resolve moral dilemmas as a precursor to moral decision-making. Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses are at high risk for encountering moral dilemmas and should have the moral sensitivity to recognize moral issues. The activities of ICU nurses in moral decision-making are guided by moral sensitivity but are also based on emotional intelligence (EI). EI, be recognized as an integral part of moral sensitivity with long-standing theoretical foundations. It is necessary to explicate the true role of EI in moral sensitivity through empirical research. To measure the level of moral sensitivity of ICU nurses and determine the relationship between moral sensitivity and EI. We recruited 467 ICU nurses of ten hospitals from March to June 2021 in Hunan Province, China for a cross-sectional questionnaire survey. The moral sensitivity and EI were measured using the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire-Revised Version into Chinese (MSQ-R-CV) and the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale-Version into Chinese (WLEIS-C). A self-report questionnaire covered sociodemographic characteristics. The average moral sensitivity score of ICU nurses was 39.41 ± 7.21. The average EI score was significantly positively correlated with the moral sensitivity score (p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that the moral sensitivities of ICU nurses were at medium levels. EI of ICU nurses can indeed affect their moral sensitivity, and the impact of each element of EI should be clarified for practical application.Entities:
Keywords: emotional intelligence; intensive care unit; moral sensitivity; nurses
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35564527 PMCID: PMC9103890 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Comparison of moral sensitivity scores across general socio-demographic characteristics.
| Variables | Scale ( | MSQ-R-CV Score |
| t/F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.535 | −0.626 | ||
| Male | 33 (8.2%) | 38.42 ± 9.63 | ||
| Female | 371 (91.8%) | 39.50 ± 6.96 | ||
| Age (years) | 0.009 * | 4.786 | ||
| ≤25 | 88 (21.8%) | 37.58 ± 6.97 | ||
| 26 ≤ t ≤ 35 | 252 (62.4%) | 39.62 ± 7.08 | ||
| ≥36 | 64 (15.8%) | 41.09 ± 7.59 | ||
| Religious beliefs | 0.371 | −0.897 | ||
| Yes | 14 (3.5%) | 37.71 ± 10.33 | ||
| No | 390 (96.5%) | 39.47 ± 7.08 | ||
| Marital status | 0.003 * | 5.746 | ||
| Unmarried | 138 (34.2%) | 37.89 ± 7.08 | ||
| Married | 252 (62.4%) | 40.06 ± 7.10 | ||
| Divorced | 14 (3.5%) | 42.79 ± 7.98 | ||
| Having children | <0.001 * | 3.747 | ||
| Yes | 230 (56.9%) | 40.56 ± 7.19 | ||
| No | 174 (43.1%) | 37.89 ± 6.96 | ||
| Hospital level | 0.168 | 1.382 | ||
| Tertiary hospital | 365 (90.3%) | 39.57 ± 7.32 | ||
| Secondary hospital | 39 (9.7%) | 37.90 ± 5.84 | ||
| Years working in an ICU | 0.020 * | 3.973 | ||
| ≤1 | 72 (17.8%) | 39.47 ± 7.40 | ||
| 1 < t ≤ 10 | 278 (68.8%) | 38.91 ± 7.18 | ||
| >10 | 54 (13.4%) | 41.91 ± 6.65 | ||
| Average night shifts per month | 0.100 | −1.647 | ||
| ≤8 | 297 (73.5%) | 39.06 ± 6.99 | ||
| 9≤ t ≤ 20 | 107 (26.5%) | 40.39 ± 7.71 | ||
| Education level | 0.178 | 1.736 | ||
| Junior college | 81 (20.0%) | 38.93 ± 6.86 | ||
| Bachelor’s degree | 310 (76.7%) | 39.39 ± 7.36 | ||
| Master’s or above | 13 (3.2%) | 42.92 ± 4.35 | ||
| Professional category | 0.009 * | 3.869 | ||
| Nurse | 74 (18.3%) | 39.74 ± 7.65 | ||
| Senior nurse | 176 (43.6%) | 38.17 ± 7.09 | ||
| Supervising nurse | 133 (32.9%) | 40.41 ± 7.15 | ||
| Deputy director of nursing or above | 21 (5.2%) | 42.33 ± 5.05 | ||
| Work intensity | 0.904 | 0.101 | ||
| More relaxed and average | 39 (9.6%) | 39.56 ± 6.95 | ||
| Tiring | 247 (61.1%) | 39.51 ± 6.84 | ||
| Very tiring | 118 (29.2%) | 39.16 ± 8.03 | ||
| Having received ethics courses at university | 0.305 | 1.028 | ||
| Yes | 216 (53.5%) | 39.75 ± 7.17 | ||
| No | 188 (46.5%) | 39.02 ± 7.25 | ||
| Having received ethics training in a hospital or their department | 0.046 * | 2.001 | ||
| Yes | 137 (33.9%) | 40.41 ± 6.93 | ||
| No | 267 (66.1%) | 38.90 ± 7.30 |
Note: * indicates that the difference is statistically significant. Abbreviation: MSQ-R-CV, the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire-Revised Version into Chinese.
The total score of MSQ-R-CV and WLEIS-C scale, and the correlation between each dimension.
| Variables | MSQ-R-CV Score | SEA | ROE | UOE | OEA | WLEIS-C Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | |||||
|
| 0.586 ** | 1 | ||||
|
| 0.506 ** | 0.783 ** | 1 | |||
|
| 0.583 ** | 0.836 ** | 0.781 ** | 1 | ||
|
| 0.542 ** | 0.779 ** | 0.778 ** | 0.783 ** | 1 | |
|
| 0.603 ** | 0.924 ** | 0.914 ** | 0.925 ** | 0.908 ** | 1 |
Note: ** p < 0.01 (two-tailed), the correlation is significant. Abbreviations: MSQ-R-CV: the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire-Revised Version into Chinese. WLEIS-C: Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale, Chinese version. SEA: self-emotion appraisal. ROE: regulation of emotion. UOE: use of emotion. OEA: others’ emotion appraisal.
Variables related to nurses’ ethical sensitivity (stepwise multiple linear regression, N = 404).
| Variables | Unstandardized Coefficient | Standardization | t |
| R2 | F |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | Standard Error | |||||||
| 0.384 | 82.967 | <0.001 | ||||||
| (Constant) | 17.486 | 1.921 | 9.104 | <0.001 | ||||
| WLEIS-C | 0.385 | 0.047 | 0.811 | 8.256 | <0.001 | |||
| ROE | −0.397 | 0.161 | −0.241 | −2.470 | 0.014 | |||
| Having children | −1.351 | 0.581 | −0.093 | −2.327 | 0.020 | |||
Abbreviation: WLEIS-C: Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale Version into Chinese. ROE: regulation of emotion.