The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of nurse-to-patient ratio legislation on nurse staffing and patient mortality, readmissions, and length of stay: a prospective study in a panel of hospitals
Open accessAbstract
Summary Background Substantial evidence indicates that patient outcomes are more favourable in hospitals with better nurse staffing. One policy designed to achieve better staffing is minimum nurse-to-patient ratio mandates, but such policies have rarely been implemented or evaluated. In 2016, Queensland (Australia) implemented minimum nurse-to-patient ratios in selected hospitals. We aimed to assess the effects of this policy on staffing levels and patient outcomes and whether both were associated. Methods For this prospective panel study, we compared Queensland hospitals subject to the ratio policy (27 intervention hospitals) and those that discharged similar patients but were not subject to ratios (28 comparison hospitals) at two timepoints: before implementation of ratios (baseline) and 2 years after implementation (post-implementation). We used standardised Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data, linked with death records, to obtain data on patient characteristics and outcomes (30-day mortality, 7-day readmissions, and length of stay [LOS]) for medical-surgical patients and survey data from 17 010 medical-surgical nurses in the study hospitals before and after policy implementation. Survey data from nurses were used to measure nurse staffing and, after linking with standardised patient data, to estimate the differential change in outcomes between patients in intervention and comparison hospitals, and determine whether nurse staffing changes were related to it. Findings We included 231 902 patients (142 986 in intervention hospitals and 88 916 in comparison hospitals) assessed at baseline (2016) and 257 253 patients (160 167 in intervention hospitals and 97 086 in comparison hospitals) assessed in the post-implementation period (2018). After implementation, mortality rates were not significantly higher than at baseline in comparison hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·07, 95% CI 0·97–1·17, p=0·18), but were significantly lower than at baseline in intervention hospitals (0·89, 0·84–0·95, p=0·0003). From baseline to post-implementation, readmissions increased in comparison hospitals (1·06, 1·01–1·12, p=0·015), but not in intervention hospitals (1·00, 0·95–1·04, p=0·92). Although LOS decreased in both groups post-implementation, the reduction was more pronounced in intervention hospitals than in comparison hospitals (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 0·95, 95% CI 0·92–0·99, p=0·010). Staffing changed in hospitals from baseline to post-implementation: of the 36 hospitals with reliable staffing measures, 30 (83%) had more than 4·5 patients per nurse at baseline, with the number decreasing to 21 (58%) post-implementation. The majority of change was at intervention hospitals, and staffing improvements by one patient per nurse produced reductions in mortality (OR 0·93, 95% CI 0·86–0·99, p=0·045), readmissions (0·93, 0·89–0·97, p<0·0001), and LOS (IRR 0·97, 0·94–0·99, p=0·035). In addition to producing better outcomes, the costs avoided due to fewer readmissions and shorter LOS were more than twice the cost of the additional nurse staffing. Interpretation Minimum nurse-to-patient ratio policies are a feasible approach to improve nurse staffing and patient outcomes with good return on investment.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Validation of a combined comorbidity index
Charlson, M., Szatrowski, T. P., Peterson, J., & Gold, J. (1994) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(94)90129-5 · Cited by 6,587 · cited 1×
“…scores for each outcome derived from models that regressed the different outcomes on 17 indicators (eg, diabetes, cancer, and so on) from the Charlson Comorbidity Index to account for confounding co morbidities, 27–30 as well as sex, age, and dummy variables for the DiagnosisRelated Group (DRG).”
MethodQuan, H., Li, B., Couris, C. M., Fushimi, K., Graham, P., Hider, P., Januel, J.-M., & Sundararajan, V. (2011) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq433 · Cited by 5,843
Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2008) · Cited by 5,345
Hospital Nurse Staffing and Patient Mortality, Nurse Burnout, and Job Dissatisfaction
Aiken, L. H. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.16.1987 · Cited by 5,226
Self-citationNew ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortality
Sundararajan, V., Henderson, T., Perry, C., Muggivan, A., Quan, H., & Ghali, W. A. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.012 · Cited by 2,439
Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Bruyneel, L., Van den Heede, K., Griffiths, P., Busse, R., Diomidous, M., Kinnunen, J., Kózka, M., Lesaffre, E., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62631-8 · Cited by 2,223
Self-citationInternet, Phone, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. 1. (2014) · Cited by 1,776
Nurse Staffing and Inpatient Hospital Mortality
Needleman, J., Buerhaus, P., Pankratz, V. S., Leibson, C. L., Stevens, S. R., & Harris, M. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa1001025 · Cited by 942
Organizational Interdependence and Intra-Organizational Structure
Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1968) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092683 · Cited by 861
Aiken, L. H., Cimiotti, J. P., Sloane, D. M., Smith, H. L., Flynn, L., & Neff, D. F. (2011) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3182330b6e · Cited by 822
Self-citation
Cited by
Nurse staffing levels and patient outcomes: a systematic review of longitudinal studies.
Dall'Ora, C., Saville, C., Rubbo, B., Turner, L., Jones, J., & Griffiths, P. (2022) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104311 · Cited by 314
Lasater, K. B., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D., French, R., Martin, B., Alexander, M., & McHugh, M. D. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052899 · Cited by 107
Self-citationAlenazy, F. S., Dettrick, Z., & Keogh, S. (2023) · Nursing in Critical Care · doi:10.1111/nicc.12737 · Cited by 65
Guo, J., Dai, Y., Gong, Y., Xu, X., & Chen, Y. (2023) · BMC Palliative Care · doi:10.1186/s12904-023-01209-1 · Cited by 9
Quality matters: examining the impact of nurse staffing challenges on clinical outcomes.
Polancich, S., Miltner, R., Montgomery, A., Dick, T., Poe, T., Brown, D., & Patrician, P. A. (2023) · Journal of Healthcare Management · doi:10.1097/jhm-d-22-00170 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- McHugh, M. D., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Windsor, C., Douglas, C., & Yates, P.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-05
- Volume
- 397
- Issue
- 10288
- Pages
- 1905-1913
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W3161127607
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 58.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of nurse-to-patient ratio legislation on nurse staffing and patient mortality, readmissions, and length of stay: a prospective study in a panel of hospitals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00768-6
- The paper
- McHugh, M. D., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Windsor, C., Douglas, C., & Yates, P. (2021). Effects of nurse-to-patient ratio legislation on nurse staffing and patient mortality, readmissions, and length of stay: a prospective study in a panel of hospitals. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00768-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.