ArticleBMC health services research2026
Moral distress among physicians and nursing staff in surgical settings: a comparative study.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMoral distress is a relevant occupational health issue in hospital settings, particularly in high-complexity environments such as surgical units, where organizational constraints, ethical dilemmas, and interprofessional dynamics shape professionals' experiences. Comparative evidence is needed to understand how moral distress manifests across professional groups working within the same clinical context.
methodsThis cross-sectional comparative study examined moral distress among physicians and nursing staff working in surgical settings at a public university hospital in southern Brazil. Data were collected from 245 healthcare professionals (167 physicians and 78 nursing staff) using the Brazilian Moral Distress Scale - Short Version (EDME-BR-VR). Group differences in moral distress dimensions were assessed using descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U tests. Comparative structural analyses were conducted using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), with separate models estimated for each professional group to examine similarities and differences in structural relationships.
resultsSignificant differences between physicians and nursing staff were observed in selected moral distress dimensions, particularly Safe and Qualified Care, Defense of Values and Rights, and Working Conditions. Across both groups, Recognition, Power, and Professional Identity emerged as a central antecedent of moral distress, showing significant associations with teamwork, working conditions, safe and qualified care, and ethical violations. Comparative PLS-SEM results indicated similar overall relational patterns across groups, with differences in the magnitude of specific structural paths reflecting profession-specific dynamics.
conclusionsMoral distress among physicians and nursing staff in surgical settings is shaped by shared organizational factors as well as profession-specific ethical pressures. Comparative analysis highlights the central role of professional recognition and identity while underscoring the need for differentiated organizational strategies to address moral distress across professional groups. These findings provide actionable insights for healthcare managers seeking to promote ethical practice, psychological safety, and sustainable work environments in surgical care.
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.