ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025
Perceptions of workload in emergency care in the Netherlands and how to influence this: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Daily, weekly, and monthly dynamics of crowding in emergency department of university clinical centre Serbia: a one-year analysis of NEDOCS score.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdequate staffing and manageable workloads are crucial for high-quality emergency care. However, high perceived workloads in the emergency department (ED) threaten both. Increased demand and staff shortages intensify these issues and cause crowding. Understanding healthcare workers' perspectives on workload is essential for effective policymaking and maintaining a durable workforce. The objective of this study was to explore the current perceived workload of ED professionals, and their vision on how to influence it and to understand the healthcare worker's perspective on proposed healthcare reforms in the Netherlands.
methodsQualitive study using semi-structured interviews with 33 healthcare professionals (ED physicians, physician assistants and nurses) working in a university medical center, and three general hospitals from March-July 2023. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The interview transcripts were coded. An inductive content analysis was performed, where codes were assigned to the transcripts and adjusted. Codes were then sorted into themes on causes of workload, consequences and proposed solutions for reducing the workload.
resultsEmergency department professionals identified increasing patient inflow, barriers to patient throughput and output, and staff shortages as key workload causes. Consequences included increased time, mental and psychological demands, leading to stress and reduced job satisfaction. A well-coordinated team and having social interaction with colleagues is seen as a key part of the profession by ED-professionals. Next to that, training and development opportunities contribute to job satisfaction. Proposed solutions involved public education, improved care coordination, technological innovations, and enhanced collaboration within and among hospitals to improve efficiency and job satisfaction, and to reduce perceived workload pressure.
conclusionsAddressing perceived workload is crucial for maintaining quality and accessibility of care. Dutch ED professionals face a high workload leading to stress and lower job satisfaction. To ensure successful changes, adequate preconditions and engaging healthcare professionals in decision-making are crucial. In future research, a stronger focus on effective work habits and processes, including provider satisfaction and workplace well-being, is necessary.
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.