Nurse staffing legislation: Empirical evidence and policy analysis

Unsafe nurse staffing conditions in hospitals have been shown to increase the risk of adverse patient events, including mortality. Consequently, United States and international professional nursing organizations often advocate for safer staffing conditions. There are a variety of factors to consider when staffing nurses for patient safety, such as the number of patients per nurse, nurse preparation, patient acuity, and nurse autonomy. The complex issue of staffing nurses often is compounded by cost issues and can become politicized. When nurse organizations' recommendations for safe staffing measures are disregarded by hospital administrations, nurse lobbyists and interest groups often pursue legislative action to protect patients and nurses from unsafe staffing conditions. This article presents a narrative review of safe nurse staffing factors and an analysis of nurse staffing legislation. Using a patient-centric lens, three state-level nurse staffing policies (mandated nurse-to-patient ratios, public reporting of staffing plans, and nurse staffing committees) were evaluated by empirical evidence, cost to hospitals and state governments, political feasibility, and potential to affect patient populations. Although nurse staffing policy analysis can be conducted in several ways, it is crucial that nurses consider empirical evidence related to staffing policies as well as evaluations of implemented policies and political influences.

A nurse practitioner-led effort to reduce 30-day heart failure readmissions

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) affects over 6.5 million Americans and is the leading reason for hospital admissions in patients over the age of 65. Readmission rates within 30 days are 21.4% nationally, and 12% of those are likely preventable. Veterans are especially vulnerable to developing cardiac diseases requiring hospitalization and subsequent readmission.

LOCAL PROBLEM

The Southern Arizona Veterans Administration Health Care System has over 5,600 patients diagnosed with HF and a 30-day readmission rate of 21.65%. The aim of this quality improvement project was to reduce 30-day all-cause readmissions by 1% over 8 weeks.

METHODS

To reduce HF readmissions, the plan-do-study-act rapid-cycle method of quality improvement was used.

INTERVENTIONS

A dedicated multidisciplinary HF clinic was formed with a cardiology nurse practitioner, clinical pharmacists, and a dietician. A veteran-centered shared decision-making tool for setting self-care goals was implemented.

RESULTS

The readmission rate of patients seen in the multidisciplinary clinic (n = 33) was reduced by 0.2%. The percentage of veterans seen within 14 days increased from 30% to 54.5%. The average number of days between discharge and cardiology follow-up improved from 45 to 19 days. Veterans were able to set at least one self-care goal 87% of the time. Patient satisfaction with the multidisciplinary clinic was high at 93%.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing a dedicated, multidisciplinary HF clinic reduced readmissions, improved timeliness of visits, and was well received. Use of a veteran-centered patient engagement tool resulted in more veterans setting self-care goals.