Impact on Quality of Care, Quality of Work Life of Psychiatric Nurses
Conditions
Keywords
Quality of life at work;Nurse;Quality of care;psychiatric
Brief summary
Psychological well-being at work is a major public health issue. The number of sick personal leaving hospitals has increased by 10% in five years and the average cost of absenteeism is around 3000 euros per agent per year. These changes are associated with the increase in turnover among nurses, thus raising the question of its impact on the quality of care. Psychological suffering at work is one of the main determinants of intention to leave for nurses.The investigators hypothesize that an improvement in the quality of work life of nurses could lead to greater loyalty, greater motivation of nurses and greater attractiveness within the community. 'institution. Among the publications on psychological well-being at work, few have been interested in the structural aspects of the organization of care and in particular to the variables specific to the caregivers themselves, such as the quality of life at work. Nevertheless, studies carried out in industry show significant and positive links between quality of life at work and performance at work. Thus, it seems appropriate to identify the factors likely to lead to an improvement in the quality of work life of psychiatric nurses and to determine the elements that can help to strengthen it. Moreover, it appears that the field of psychiatry could constitute an ideal field of experimentation. Psychiatry teams treat patients with chronic, severe and debilitating conditions, which are subject to significant social stigmatization, and expose nurses to a high rate of burnout. The organization of psychiatric care is also multidisciplinary. The various care procedures allow caregivers to carry out activities that include more or less significant participation in decision-making. Also, studying the determinants of the quality of working life among psychiatric nurses seems to us an important goal in order to put in place actions to strengthen psychological well-being at work, and thus to reduce turn-over and improve the quality of care.
Detailed description
Psychological well-being at work is a major public health issue. The number of sick personal leaving hospitals has increased by 10% in five years and the average cost of absenteeism is around 3000 euros per agent per year. These changes are associated with the increase in turnover among nurses, thus raising the question of its impact on the quality of care. Psychological suffering at work is one of the main determinants of intention to leave for nurses. The investigators hypothesize that an improvement in the quality of work life of nurses could allow greater loyalty, greater motivation of nurses and greater attractiveness within the institution. Among the publications on psychological well-being at work, few have been interested in the structural aspects of the organization of care and in particular to the variables specific to the caregivers themselves, such as the quality of life at work. Nevertheless, studies carried out in industry show significant and positive links between quality of life at work and performance at work. Thus, it seems appropriate to identify the factors likely to lead to an improvement in the quality of life at work of psychiatric nurses and to determine the elements that can help reinforce it. Moreover, it appears that the field of psychiatry could constitute an ideal field of experimentation. Psychiatry teams treat patients with chronic, severe and disabling conditions, which are subject to significant social stigma, and expose nurses to a high rate of burnout. The organization of psychiatric care is also multidisciplinary. The various care procedures allow caregivers to carry out activities that include more or less significant participation in decision-making. Also, studying the determinants of the quality of life at work among psychiatric nurses seems to be an important goal in order to implement actions to strengthen psychological well-being at work, and thus reduce turnover and to improve the quality of care. The main objective is to identify the individual, organizational and managerial factors that can explain changes in the quality of work life of psychiatric nurses. To study the link between changes in the quality of work life of nurses and the quality of care delivered to patients. Study the effects of a change in the quality of work life of nurses on turnover.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALQuality of live at work
The judging criteria will be collected using two questionnaires: a questionnaire sent to the local referent of each center and a questionnaire for each nurse. Because the study is longitudinal (two collections of data), the questionnaires will be completed twice to twelve months apart by the same nurses.
Sponsors
University Hospital, Tours
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 67 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Nurse with a degree in the state or psychiatric sector. * Working in a psychiatric ward that offers full hospitalization, a day hospital (HdJ) or a medico-psychological center (CMP).
Exclusion criteria
* N/A
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Measuring the quality of work life of nurses by the French version of the quality of life (QOL) at work scale of Elizur and Shye (1990). | 1 year | The quality of work life of nurses as measured by the French version of the quality of life at work scale of Elizur and Shye (1990). This scale assesses four dimensions of quality of life at work. It has 16 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 6 (mostly). The higher the score, the better the quality of life at work. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Measuring job satisfaction using an adaptation of the job satisfaction scale of Fouquereau and Rioux (2002). | 1 year | Job satisfaction measure using an adaptation of the job satisfaction scale of Fouquereau and Rioux (2002).It has 5 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (very unsatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). The higher the score, the better the quality of life at work. |
| Measuring work engagement using the French version of UWES-9 (Schaufeli, Bakker, Salanova, 2006). | 1 year | Work engagement measured using the French version of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) (Schaufeli, Bakker, Salanova, 2006).It has 9 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (always). The higher the score, the better the work engagement. |
| Measuring the satisfaction of psychological needs at work using the satisfaction scale of the psychological needs of Gillet, Rosnet and Vallerand (2008). | 1 year | The satisfaction of psychological needs at work measured using the satisfaction scale of the psychological needs of Gillet, Rosnet and Vallerand (2008).It has 28 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The higher the score, the better the satisfaction. |
| Measuring the feeling of self-efficacy from the questionnaire referring to specific behaviors in General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) Nagels (2008) | 1 year | The feeling of self-efficacy (GSE) measured from the questionnaire referring to specific behaviors in Nagels (2008); It has 10 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The range is from 10 to 40 points. The higher the score, the better feeling of self-efficacy. |
| Measuring psychological well-being at work using the scale of Gilbert, Dagenais-Desmarais and Savoie (2011). | 1 year | Psychological well-being at work measure using the scale of Gilbert, Dagenais-Desmarais and Savoie (2011).This scale assesses psychological well-being at work. It has 22 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (almost always). The higher the score, the better the quality of life at work. |
| Measuring the support for autonomy using a version adapted to the work context of the Measuring the Perceived Autonomy Support Scale for Exercise Settings (PASSES) of Gillet, Vallerand, Paty, Gobancé and Berjot (2010). | 1 year | Support for autonomy measured using a version adapted to the work context of the PASSES scale; Gillet, Vallerand, Paty, Gobancé and Berjot (2010).It has 12 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)) to 7 (strongly agree).The higher the score, the better the perceived autonomy. |
| Measuring the personality using Big Five Inventory (BFI) by John, Donahue and Kentle (1991). | 1 year | Personality measured using BFI by John, Donahue and Kentle (1991).It has 44 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (disagree a lot) to 5 (agree a lot). The higher the score, the better the personality |
| Measuring the well-treatment by a self-evaluation of patient well-being practices, Terrien,Anthoine and Mouret (2012). | 1 year | Well-treatment measured by a self-evaluation of patient well-being practices, Terrien, Anthoine and Mouret (2012). It has 16 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (always) to 5 (never ). The lower the score, the better the well-treatement. . |
| Measuring thetransformational leadership using the Global Transformational Leasership scale (GTL) developed by Carless, Wearing and Mann (2000). | 1 year | Transformational leadership measured using the GTL scale developed by Carless, Wearing and Mann (2000). It has 7 items that can be answered using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (frequently, if not always). The higher the score, the better the Transformational leadership |
Outcome results
None listed