Stressful times call for team-based measures:psychiatric nursing in the UK National Health Service

Background: Team-based working is now an inherent part of effective health care delivery. Previous research has identified that team working is associated with positive mental health and well-being outcomes for individuals operating in an effective team environment. This is a particularly important topic in the health services context, although little empirical attention has been paid to mental-health services. Psychiatric nurses work on a day-to-day basis with a particularly stressful and demanding client group in an environment which is characterised by high demands, uncertainty, and limited resources. This paper specifically focuses on psychiatric nurses working in National Health Service (NHS) and casts some light on the ways in which effective team-based working can help to alleviate a number of occupational stressors and strains. Method: A questionnaire method (2005 NHS Staff Survey) was employed to collect data from 6655 psychiatric nurses from 64 different NHS Trusts. The hypotheses were concerned with four overall measures from the survey; effective team working, occupational stress, work pressure and social support. Hypothesis 1 stated that effective team working will have a significant negative relationship with occupational stress and work pressure. Further, Hypothesis 2 stated that social support from supervisors and co-workers will moderate this relationship. Findings: Data was treated with a series of regression analyses. For Hypothesis 1, working in a real team did have main effects on work pressure and accounted for 1.6 per cent of the variance. Using the Nagelkerke R square value, working in a real team also had main effects on occupational stress an accounted for approximately 2.8 per cent of the variance. Further, the Exp (B) value of 0.662 suggests that the odds of suffering from occupational stress are cut by 33.8 per cent when a psychiatric nurse works in a real team. Results failed to provide support for Hypothesis 2. The analysis then went on to adopt a unique approach for assessing the extent of real team-based working, distinguishing between real teams, and a number of pseudo team typologies, as well as the absence of teamwork all together. As was hypothesised, results demonstrated that psychiatric nurses working in real teams (ones with clear objectives, where-by team members work closely with one another to achieve team objectives and meet regularly to discuss team effectiveness and how it can be improved) experienced the lowest levels of stress and work pressure of the sample. However, contrary to prediction, results indicated that psychiatric nurses working in any type of pseudo team actually experienced significantly higher levels of stress and work pressure than those who did not report as working in a team at all. Discussion: These findings have serious implications for NHS Mental Health Trusts, which may not be implementing, structuring and managing their nursing teams adequately. Indeed, results suggest that poorly-structured team work may actually facilitate stress and pressure in the workplace. Conversely, well-structured real teams serve to reduce stress and work pressure, which in turn not only enhances the working lives and well-being of psychiatric nurses, but also greatly improves the service that the NHS provides to its users.

Classifying clinical decision making:interpreting nursing intuition, heuristics and medical diagnosis

This is the second of two linked papers exploring decision making in nursing. The first paper, 'Classifying clinical decision making: a unifying approach' investigated difficulties with applying a range of decision-making theories to nursing practice. This is due to the diversity of terminology and theoretical concepts used, which militate against nurses being able to compare the outcomes of decisions analysed within different frameworks. It is therefore problematic for nurses to assess how good their decisions are, and where improvements can be made. However, despite the range of nomenclature, it was argued that there are underlying similarities between all theories of decision processes and that these should be exposed through integration within a single explanatory framework. A proposed solution was to use a general model of psychological classification to clarify and compare terms, concepts and processes identified across the different theories. The unifying framework of classification was described and this paper operationalizes it to demonstrate how different approaches to clinical decision making can be re-interpreted as classification behaviour. Particular attention is focused on classification in nursing, and on re-evaluating heuristic reasoning, which has been particularly prone to theoretical and terminological confusion. Demonstrating similarities in how different disciplines make decisions should promote improved multidisciplinary collaboration and a weakening of clinical elitism, thereby enhancing organizational effectiveness in health care and nurses' professional status. This is particularly important as nurses' roles continue to expand to embrace elements of managerial, medical and therapeutic work. Analysing nurses' decisions as classification behaviour will also enhance clinical effectiveness, and assist in making nurses' expertise more visible. In addition, the classification framework explodes the myth that intuition, traditionally associated with nurses' decision making, is less rational and scientific than other approaches.