| 1. |
- Johnston, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Review article: Staff perception of the emergency department working environment: Integrative review of the literature
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Emergency Medicine Australasia. - : Wiley. - 1742-6731 .- 1742-6723. ; 28:1, s. 7-26
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Employees in EDs report increasing role overload because of critical staff shortages, budgetary cuts and increased patient numbers and acuity. Such overload could compromise staff satisfaction with their working environment. This integrative review identifies, synthesises and evaluates current research around staff perceptions of the working conditions in EDs. A systematic search of relevant databases, using MeSH descriptors ED/EDs, Emergency room/s, ER/s, or A&E coupled with (and) working environment, working condition/s, staff perception/s, as well as reference chaining was conducted. We identified 31 key studies that were evaluated using the mixed methods assessment tool (MMAT). These comprised 24 quantitative-descriptive studies, four mixed descriptive/comparative (non-randomised controlled trial) studies and three qualitative studies. Studies included varied widely in quality with MMAT scores ranging from 0% to 100%. A key finding was that perceptions of working environment varied across clinical staff and study location, but that high levels of autonomy and teamwork offset stress around high pressure and high volume workloads. The large range of tools used to assess staff perception of working environment limits the comparability of the studies. A dearth of intervention studies around enhancing working environments in EDs limits the capacity to recommend evidence-based interventions to improve staff morale. (c) 2016 The Authors. Emergency Medicine Australasia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine
|
|
| 2. |
- Nichols, Erin K., et al.
(författare)
-
The WHO 2016 verbal autopsy instrument : An international standard suitable for automated analysis by InterVA, InSilicoVA, and Tariff 2.0
- 2018
-
Ingår i: PLoS Medicine. - : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1549-1277 .- 1549-1676. ; 15:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Verbal autopsy (VA) is a practical method for determining probable causes of death at the population level in places where systems for medical certification of cause of death are weak. VA methods suitable for use in routine settings, such as civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems, have developed rapidly in the last decade. These developments have been part of a growing global momentum to strengthen CRVS systems in low-income countries. With this momentum have come pressure for continued research and development of VA methods and the need for a single standard VA instrument on which multiple automated diagnostic methods can be developed.Methods and findings: In 2016, partners harmonized a WHO VA standard instrument that fully incorporates the indicators necessary to run currently available automated diagnostic algorithms. The WHO 2016 VA instrument, together with validated approaches to analyzing VA data, offers countries solutions to improving information about patterns of cause-specific mortality. This VA instrument offers the opportunity to harmonize the automated diagnostic algorithms in the future.Conclusions: Despite all improvements in design and technology, VA is only recommended where medical certification of cause of death is not possible. The method can nevertheless provide sufficient information to guide public health priorities in communities in which physician certification of deaths is largely unavailable. The WHO 2016 VA instrument, together with validated approaches to analyzing VA data, offers countries solutions to improving information about patterns of cause-specific mortality.
|
|
