Faculty of Sport, Health and Applied Science, St Mary's University, London TW1 4SX, UK.
Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7YH, UK.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Jun;106:103513. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103513. Epub 2019 Dec 30.
Nurses and midwives make up almost 50% of the global healthcare shift working workforce. Shift work interferes with sleep and causes fatigue with adverse effects for nurses' and midwives' health, as well as on patient safety and care. Where other safety-critical sectors have developed Fatigue Risk Management Systems, healthcare is behind the curve; with published literature only focussing on the evaluation of discreet sleep-related/fatigue-management interventions. Little is known, however, about which interventions have been evaluated for nurses and midwives. Our review is a critical first step to building the evidence-base for healthcare organisations seeking to address this important operational issue.
We address two questions: (1) what sleep-related/fatigue-management interventions have been assessed in nurses and midwives and what is their evidence-base? and (2) what measures are used by researchers to assess intervention effectiveness?
The following databases were searched in November, 2018 with no limit on publication dates: MEDLINE, PsychINFO and CINAHL.
We included: (1) studies conducted in adult samples of nurses and/or midwives that had evaluated a sleep-related/fatigue-management intervention; and (2) studies that reported intervention effects on fatigue, sleep, or performance at work, and on measures of attention or cognitive performance (as they relate to the impact of shift working on patient safety/care).
The search identified 798 potentially relevant articles, out of which 32 met our inclusion criteria. There were 8619 participants across the included studies and all were nurses (88.6% female). We did not find any studies conducted in midwives nor any studies conducted in the UK, with most studies conducted in the US, Italy and Taiwan. There was heterogeneity both in terms of the interventions evaluated and the measures used to assess effectiveness. Napping could be beneficial but there was wide variation regarding nap duration and timing, and we need to understand more about barriers to implementation. Longer shifts, shift patterns including nights, and inadequate recovery time between shifts (quick returns) were associated with poorer sleep, increased sleepiness and increased levels of fatigue. Light exposure and/or light attenuation interventions showed promise but the literature was dominated by small, potentially unrepresentative samples.
The literature related to sleep-related/fatigue-management interventions for nurses and midwives is fragmented and lacks cohesion. Further empirical work is warranted with a view to developing comprehensive Fatigue Risk Management Systems to protect against fatigue in nurses, midwives, and other shift working healthcare staff.
护士和助产士几乎占全球倒班医护人员的 50%。轮班工作会干扰睡眠并导致疲劳,对护士和助产士的健康以及患者的安全和护理产生不利影响。在其他安全关键行业已经开发出疲劳风险管理系统的情况下,医疗保健却落后了;已发表的文献仅侧重于评估离散的与睡眠/疲劳管理相关的干预措施。然而,我们对哪些干预措施已针对护士和助产士进行了评估知之甚少。我们的审查是为寻求解决这一重要运营问题的医疗机构建立证据基础的重要第一步。
我们要回答两个问题:(1)针对护士和助产士,已经评估了哪些与睡眠/疲劳管理相关的干预措施,其证据基础是什么?以及(2)研究人员使用哪些措施来评估干预措施的效果?
2018 年 11 月,在没有发布日期限制的情况下,我们在以下数据库中进行了搜索:MEDLINE、PsychINFO 和 CINAHL。
我们纳入了:(1)针对成年护士和/或助产士样本进行的研究,这些研究评估了与睡眠/疲劳管理相关的干预措施;以及(2)报告了疲劳、睡眠或工作绩效方面的干预效果的研究,以及注意力或认知表现方面的研究(因为它们与轮班工作对患者安全/护理的影响有关)。
搜索共确定了 798 篇潜在相关文章,其中 32 篇符合我们的纳入标准。纳入的研究共有 8619 名参与者,均为护士(88.6%为女性)。我们没有发现任何针对助产士的研究,也没有任何在英国进行的研究,大多数研究在美国、意大利和中国台湾进行。评估的干预措施以及评估有效性的措施都存在异质性。小睡可能有益,但小睡持续时间和时间存在很大差异,我们需要更多地了解实施障碍。较长的轮班时间、包括夜班在内的轮班模式以及轮班之间恢复时间(快速返回)不足与睡眠质量较差、嗜睡增加和疲劳水平增加有关。光照暴露和/或光照衰减干预措施显示出前景,但文献主要由小样本、可能无代表性的样本组成。
与护士和助产士的与睡眠/疲劳管理相关的干预措施相关的文献是零散的,缺乏凝聚力。需要进一步进行实证工作,以期开发全面的疲劳风险管理系统,以防止护士、助产士和其他轮班医护人员疲劳。