ArticleBMC health services research2026
"Either you feel bad and stay, or you're smart and leave" - perspectives from emergency department staff in Stockholm, Sweden.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundJob attrition and burnout among healthcare staff is a substantial challenge for healthcare systems globally. Staff working in emergency departments (ED) face work environment challenges including moral distress. This study explores causes, consequences, and contextual dimensions of moral distress among ED staff.
methodsA total of 36 healthcare professionals from EDs at two hospitals in Stockholm, Sweden, participated in the study. Seven interprofessional focus group sessions were conducted. These were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsParticipants described providing care under conditions of limited resources and high demands. Drivers of moral distress included inadequate nursing care, futile care, ethical dilemmas, organizational barriers, experiencing team-related challenges and lack of control. Ethical challenges were particularly evident in the care of vulnerable groups, especially geriatric and palliative patients. Participants identified systemic factors such as organizational errors, long waiting times, insufficient staffing, and lack of hospital beds as contributors to moral distress. Reported consequences included worsened well-being, a negatively influenced self-image, delayed reactions, and emotional numbing. Some participants expressed intentions to leave their roles, alongside frustration and distrust toward the healthcare system.
conclusionsMoral distress emerged as a persistent and normalized feature of ED work, percieved to be primarily driven by resource limitation. These issues need addressing on a policy level. In parallel, strategies to manage moral distress in the ED setting are needed. This has implications for individual healthcare workers' well-being and organizational stability. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.