ArticleNursing in critical care2026
Designing Nurse-Physician Collaboration to Improve Psychological Safety, Satisfaction and Commitment of Critical Care Nurses-A Multi-Informant Survey Study.
Article in Nursing in critical care, 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
Abstract
backgroundPsychological safety is a key component of effective healthcare teams and may impact job satisfaction, commitment and change readiness among critical care nurses. The design of nurse-physician collaboration may influence psychological safety but has not been systematically studied in intensive care settings.
aimsTo investigate how nurse autonomy, participation in ward rounds, quality of nurse-physician relations and team size relate to psychological safety in critical care nurses, and how psychological safety mediates statistical effects on job satisfaction, affective commitment and commitment to change. STUDY
designWe performed a multicentre, cross-sectional, multi-informant survey study conducted between December 2013 and March 2015 using a convenience sample of 22 intensive care units (ICUs) in 19 German hospitals, including university, public and private hospitals. Organisational data were provided by ICU leaders. Validated scales were used to assess psychological safety, job satisfaction, affective commitment to unit and commitment to change (nurse survey), and nurse-physician collaboration (physician survey). An organisational questionnaire was developed to assess nurses' autonomy and structural factors. Linear regression and mediation analyses tested hypothesised associations at the unit level.
resultsOf 1216 invited nurses and 379 invited physicians, 600 and 217 participated, respectively. Higher nurse autonomy (0.51 [95% CI: 0.1, 0.91], p = 0.016), consistent participation in ward rounds (0.51 [0.11, 0.91], p = 0.014), better nurse-physician collaboration (0.59 [0.21, 0.97], p = 0.004) and lower number of nurses working in a unit (-0.55 [-0.94, -0.16], p = 0.008) were statistically significantly associated with higher psychological safety in linear regression analysis. Psychological safety mediated effects of all predictors on job satisfaction, affective commitment and commitment to change.
conclusionsPsychological safety among critical care nurses can be enhanced through interprofessional collaboration, nurse autonomy and smaller team structures. These findings inform organisational strategies to improve nurse wellbeing and retention, as well as organisational readiness to change. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Fostering interprofessional collaboration and enhancing nurses' autonomy in critical care are key to enhancing psychological safety and thereby enhancing job satisfaction and retention. Increasing team size can have unintended negative consequences that need to be weighted against potential gains.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register: DRKS00005357.
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.