ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2022
Assessment of the Critical Care Work Environment of Intensive Care Unit Nurses in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthy work environment from the perspective of Jordanian ICU nurses: a descriptive cross-sectional study using the AACN assessment tool.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Influence of the work environment on patient safety and stress among healthcare professionals.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, practice, and perceived barriers toward evidence-based practice among Palestinian nurses in intensive care units.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Effect of psychoeducational program and relaxation training on critical care nurses' stress regarding care of patients with delirium.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2024Article
- Nursing Practice Environments in Hospitals: A Comparative Study between Portugal and Brazil.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Article
- Sociodemographic and occupational influences on health professionals' quality of life.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2024Article
- Validation and Measurement of Psychometric Properties of the "Nursing Work Environment Questionnaire" (NWE-q) in Italian Nurses.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nurses play a major role in the delivery of complex and challenging critical care in intensive care units (ICUs). Assessment of work environment is essential indicators of hospital management and can be applied to workforce planning and identifying nursing profession needs. The American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN) recognized six standards for a healthy work environment and developed the Healthy Work Environment Assessment Tool (HWEAT). The aim of this study was to assess the work environment of ICU nurses in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at public and private hospitals. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire that included the sociodemographic characteristics and the AACN HWEAT. Data were analyzed to obtain descriptive and inferential statistics. The Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were employed to compare demographic data, on the basis of the overall mean HWEAT score. Results: The study participants were 238 ICU nurses, who were predominantly female (83%). The mean overall HWEAT score was 3.55±1.03, which is within the "good" range, and was higher for male nurses (3.66), nurses aged ≥41 years (3.76), and nurses with postgraduate education (4.04), work experiences of >10 years (3.63), and alternate work shifts (3.6). Nurses in private hospitals had significantly higher overall scores than nurses in public hospitals (3.83 vs 3.19, P<0.001). All HWEAT standards ("effective decision-making", "authentic leadership", "appropriate staffing", "true collaboration", "skilled communication", and "meaningful recognition") were rated as good (mean range, 3.43-3.63). Conclusion: The study results could assist hospitals in prioritizing the adoption of AACN HWE standards. A target benchmark of "good" was established for both the overall score and each standard, which indicates a good work environment as perceived by ICU nurses. In Addition, interpersonal differences should be considered when developing improvement initiatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.