CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Nursing education and managementPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsHospital Admissions and Outcomes

The daily relationships between staffing, safety perceptions and personality in hospital nursing: A longitudinal on-line diary study

Louch, Gemma, O’Hara, Jane, Gardner, Peter, O’Connor, Daryl B.·2016·International Journal of Nursing Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.02.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background The association between poor staffing conditions and negative patient safety consequences is well established within hospital nursing. However, many studies have been limited to nurse population level associations, and have used routine data to examine relationships. As a result, it is less clear how these relationships might be manifested at the individual nurse level on a day-to-day basis. Furthermore, personality may have direct and moderating roles in terms of work environment and patient safety associations, but limited research has explored personality in this context. Objective To further our understanding of these associations, this paper takes a within-person approach to examine nurses' daily perceptions of staffing and patient safety. In addition, we explore the potential role of personality factors as moderators of daily level associations. Method We recruited eighty-three hospital nurses from three acute NHS Trusts in the UK between March and July 2013. Nurses completed online end-of-shift diaries over three-five shifts which collected information on perceptions of staffing, patient-nurse ratio and patient safety (perceptions of patient safety, ability to act as a safe practitioner, and workplace cognitive failure). Personality was also assessed within a baseline questionnaire. Data were analysed using hierarchical linear modelling, and moderation effects of personality factors were examined using simple slopes analyses, which decomposed relationships at high and low levels of the moderator. Results On days when lower patient-nurse ratios were indicated, nurses reported being more able to act as a safe practitioner (p=.011) and more favourable perceptions of patient safety (p=<.001). Additionally, when staffing was perceived more favourably, nurses reported being more able to act as a safe practitioner (p=<.001), more favourable perceptions of patient safety (p=<.001) and experienced less workplace cognitive failure (p=<.001). Conscientiousness and emotional stability emerged as key moderators of daily level associations between staffing and patient safety variables, with many relationships differing at high and low levels of these personality factors. Conclusion The findings elucidate the potential mechanisms by which patient safety risks arise within hospital nursing, and suggest that nurses may not respond to staffing conditions in the same way, dependent upon personality. Further understanding of these relationships will enable staff to be supported in terms of work environment conditions on an individual basis.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.02.010

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Safe Practitioner measure was validated in previous studies.

    “These measures were validated in previous studies (Louch et al., 2016, 2017).”

    From Wellbeing, burnout, and safe practice among healthcare professionals: predictive influences of mindfulness, values, and self-compassion (2022) · cites this paper as Louch et al., 2016

    The Safe practitioner measure section (p. 10) says the authors developed the one-item measure for this study because no suitable individual-practitioner measure was available. A feasibility focus group considered the item appropriate, but the paper does not describe it as having been validated in previous studies. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 56

  1. 1 Alenius LS, Tishelman C, Runesdotter S, et al. Staffing and resource adequacy strongly related to RNs' assessment of patient safety: a national study of RNs working in acute-care hospitals in Sweden. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23:242-249.
  2. 2 Duffield C, Diers D, O'Brien-Pallas L, et al. Nursing staffing, nursing workload, the work environment and patient outcomes. Appl Nurs Res. 2011;24(4):244-255.
  3. 3 Hughes RG, Clancy C M. Working conditions that support patient safety. J Nurs Care Qual . 2005;20(4):289-292.
  4. 4 Lin L, Liang BA. Addressing the nursing work environment to promote patient safety. Nurs Forum . 1997;42(1):20-30.
  5. 5 Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, et al. Hospital nurse staffing and patient mortality, nurse burnout, and job dissatisfaction. JAMA. 2002;88(16):1987-1993.
  6. 6 Berdot S, Sabatier B, Gillaizeau F, et al. Evaluation of drug administration errors in a teaching hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):60.
  7. 7 Pronovost PJ, Jenckes MW, Dorman T, et al. Organizational characteristics of intensive care units related to outcomes of abdominal aortic surgery. JAMA. 1999; 281 (14):1310-1317.
  8. 12 Liu LF, Lee S, Chia PF, et al. Exploring the association between nurse workload and nurse-sensitive patient safety outcome indicators. J Nurs Res . 2012;20(4):300-309.
  9. 13 Rafferty AM, Clarke SP, Coles J, et al. Outcomes of variation in hospital nurse staffing in English hospitals: cross-sectional analysis of survey data and discharge records. Int J Nurs Stud . 2007;44(2):175-182.
  10. 14 Affleck G, Zautra, A, Tennen, H, &amp; Armeli, S. Multilevel daily process designs for consulting and clinical psychology: A preface for the perplexed. J Consult Clin Psychol . 1999;67(5):746-754.
  11. 15 Aiken LH, Sermeus W, Van den Heede K, et al. Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States. BMJ . 2012;344:e1717.
  12. 16 Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Bruyneel L, et al. Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective obersational study. Lancet . 2014(9931);383: 1824-1830.
  13. 17 Sermeus W, Aiken LH, Van den Heede K, et al. Nurse forecasting in Europe (RN4CAST): Rationale, design and methodology. BMC Nurs . 2011;10(1):6.
  14. 18 McCrae RR, John OP. An introduction to the five -factor model and its applications . J Pers . 1992;60(2):175-215.
  15. 20 Hurtz GM, Donovan JJ. Personality and job performance: the Big Five revisited. J Appl Psychol . 2000;85(6):869.
  16. 21 Salgado JF. The Five Factor Model of personality and job performance in the European Community. J Appl Psychol . 1997;82(1):30-43.
  17. 22 Barrick MR, Stewart GL, Neubert MJ, et al. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. J Appl Psychol. 1998;83(3):377-391.
  18. 23 Morgeson FP, Reider MH, Campion MA. Selecting individuals in team settings: the importance of social skills, personality characteristics, and teamwork knowledge. Personnel Psychology. 2005;58(3):583-611.
  19. 25 Judge TA, Bono JE. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits -self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability -with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 2001;86(1):80.
  20. 24 Clarke S, Robertson I. A meta -analytic review of the Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occupational and non -occupational settings. J Occup Organ Psychol . 2005;78(3):355-376.
  21. 26 Salgado JF. Big Five personality dimensions and job performance in army and civil occupations: A European perspective. Human Performance . 1998;11(2-3):271-288.
  22. 27 Tett RP, Jackson DN, Rothstein M. Personality measures as predictors of job performance: a meta -analytic review. Personnel Psychology . 1991;44(4):703-742.
  23. 28 Clarke S. Contrasting perceptual, attitudinal and dispositional approaches to accident involvement in the workplace. Safety Science. 2006;44(6):537-550.
  24. 29 Teng CI, Chang SS, Hsu KH. Emotional stability of nurses: impact on patient safety. J Adv Nurs . 2009;65(10):2088-2096.
  25. 30 Teng CI, Hsu KH, Chien RC, et al. Influence of personality on care quality of hospital nurses. J Nurs Care Qual . 2007;22(4):358-364.
  26. 31 Reason J. Human error: models and management. BMJ . 2000;320(7237):768-770.
  27. 32 Broadbent DE, Cooper PF, FitzGerald P, et al. The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. Br J Clin Psychol . 1982;21(1):1-16.
  28. 33 Elfering A, Grebner S, Dudan A. Job characteristics in nursing and cognitive failure at work. Saf Health Work . 2011;2(2):194-200.
  29. 34 Park YM, Kim SY. Impacts of job stress and cognitive failure on patient safety incidents among hospital nurses. Saf Health Work . 2013;4(4):210-215.
  30. 35 Johnston DW, Jones MC, Charles K, et al. Stress in nurses: stress-related affect and its determinants examined over the nursing day. Ann Behav Med . 2013;45(3):348-356.
  31. 36 Jones MC, Johnston D. Do mood and the receipt of work-based support influence nurse perceived quality of care delivery? A behavioural diary study. J Clin Nurs . 2013;22(56):890-901.
  32. 37 Bolger N, Davis A, Rafaeli E. Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annu Rev Psychol . 2003;54(1):579-616.
  33. 38 Ferguson E. The use of diary methods in clinical and health psychology. In: Miles J &amp; Gilbert P, editors. A handbook of research methods in clinical and health psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
  34. 40 Griffin MA. Interaction between individuals and situations: Using HLM procedures to estimate reciprocal relationships. Journal of Management. 1997;23(6):759-773.
  35. 41 Hofmann DA. An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management. 1997;23(6):723-744.
  36. 42 Green AS, Rafaeli E, Bolger N, et al. Paper or plastic? Data equivalence in paper and electronic diaries. Psychological Methods. 2006;11(1):87-105.
  37. 43 Goldberg LR. The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychol Assess . 1992; 4 (1):26-42.
  38. 45 Wallace JC, Chen G. Development and validation of a work -specific measure of cognitive failure: Implications for occupational safety. J Occup Organ Psychol . 2005;78(4):615632.
  39. 46 Field AP. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London, England: SAGE; 2009.
  40. 48 Bryk A, Raudenbush SW. Hierarchical Linear Models for Social and Behavioral Research: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE; 1992.
  41. 49 Kreft IG, De Leeuw J, Aiken LS. The effect of different forms of centering in hierarchical linear models. Multivariate Behav Res . 1995;30(1):1-21.
  42. 50 Nezlek JB. Multilevel random coefficient analyses of event-and interval-contingent data in social and personality psychology research. Pers Soc Psychol Bull . 2001; 27 (7):771785.
  43. 51 Little RJA. A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. J Am Stat Assoc . 1988;83(404):1198-1202.
  44. 52 Preacher KJ, Curran PJ, Bauer DJ. Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. J Educ Behav Stat . 2006;31(4):437-448.
  45. 53 Cho SH, Yun, SC. Bed-to-nurse ratios, provision of basic nursing care, and in-hospital and 30-day mortality among acute stroke patients admitted to an intensive care unit: Cross-sectional analysis of survey and administrative data. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009; 46 (8):1092-1101.
  46. 56 Needleman J, Buerhaus P. Nurse staffing and patient safety: current knowledge and implications for action. Int J Qual Health Care . 2003;5(4):275-277.
  47. 55 Krauss MJ, Evanoff B, Hitcho E, et al. A case -control study of patient, medication, and care -related risk factors for inpatient falls. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 20 (2):116-122.
  48. 57 Hansen LO, Williams MV, Singer SJ. Perceptions of hospital safety climate and incidence of readmission. Health Serv Res . 2011;46(2):596-616.
  49. 58 Hofmann DA, Mark B. An investigation of the relationship between safety climate and medication errors as well as other nurse and patient outcomes. Personnel Psychology. 2006;59(4):847-869.
  50. 59 Huang DT, Clermont G, Kong L, et al. Intensive care unit safety culture and outcomes: a US multicenter study. Int J Qual Health Care . 2010;22(3):151-161.
  51. 60 Mardon RE, Khanna K, Sorra J, et al. Exploring relationships between hospital patient safety culture and adverse events. J Patient Saf . 2010;6(4):226-232.
  52. 61 Cellar DF, Nelson ZC, Yorke CM, et al. The five -factor model and safety in the workplace: Investigating the relationships between personality and accident involvement. Journal of Prevention &amp; Intervention in the Community. 2001; 22 (1):43-52.
  53. 62 McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. Updating Norman's "Adequate Taxonomy": Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. J Pers Soc Psychol . 1985;49(3):710-721.
  54. 63 Miller SL. Values-based recruitment in health care. Nursing Standard . 2015;29(21):37-41.
  55. 64 Ellis R, Griffiths L, Hogard E. Constructing the Nurse Match instrument to measure professional identity and values in nursing. J Nurs Care. 2015;4:245. doi: 10.4172/2167-1168.10000245 · DOI
  56. 65 Parks L, Guay RP. Personality, values and motivation. Personality and Individual Differences. 2009;47:675-684.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Louch, G., O’Hara, J., Gardner, P., & O’Connor, D. B.
Affiliations
  • Bradford Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
Corresponding author
Louch, Gemma
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
59
Pages
27-37
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.02.010
OpenAlex
W2286181265
Cited by
31
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4
FWCI
11.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • School of Psychology, University of Leeds
  • Bradford Institute for Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
nurse staffing, patient safety, nurse personality, conscientiousness, emotional stability, within-person variability, hospital nursing, moderating effect
MeSH terms
Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Nursing Staff, Hospital, Personality, Personnel Staffing and Scheduling, Patient Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review