Patients and staff perspectives on hospital ward strain and its impacts on patient care and the workforce: a mixed-methods systematic review.

IF 2.2
Georgia Bercades, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, David Brealey, Isla Kuhn, Seo Yeon Yoon, Grainne Brady, John Welch, Katharina Kohler
{"title":"Patients and staff perspectives on hospital ward strain and its impacts on patient care and the workforce: a mixed-methods systematic review.","authors":"Georgia Bercades, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, David Brealey, Isla Kuhn, Seo Yeon Yoon, Grainne Brady, John Welch, Katharina Kohler","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzag101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hospital ward strain occurs when care demands exceed available staffing, beds, and resources, posing a significant threat to safe inpatient care. While emergency department and intensive care settings have been extensively studied, ward-level pressures have received less attention, particularly from the perspectives of patients and frontline staff. This review aimed to synthesize current evidence on how hospital ward strain is experienced by staff and patients, and its implications for care quality, safety, and workforce sustainability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed methods systematic review was conducted on patient and staff perspectives on hospital ward strain. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and HMIC were searched for empirical studies published from January 2000 to March 2025. Three reviewers screened titles and abstracts in pairs; full-text assessment was conducted by one reviewer with independent verification of a random 20% sample. The Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess methodological quality. Findings were analysed using Donabedian's Structure-Process-Outcome (SPO) model and Hollnagel's Resilience framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 9,943 studies identified, 16 observational and non-randomized studies met the inclusion criteria, representing diverse healthcare settings across multiple countries. Most studies (87.5%) focused exclusively on staff perspectives; only two included patient experiences. Structural pressures (inadequate staffing, bed capacity constraints) consistently led to process failures (care delays, missed care, coordination breakdowns), resulting in burnout, turnover, quality and safety trade-offs, and compromised patient safety. Ward resilience was mainly reactive: respond and monitor were evident, but anticipate and learn, were mostly absent. Patient acuity was inconsistently reported, limiting cross-study comparison.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ward strain is a systemic patient safety issue requiring structural solutions beyond staff resilience. Patient perspectives remain underrepresented and must be prioritized in future research. Policymakers should invest in anticipatory and learning resilience capacities through workforce planning, real-time monitoring, and formal learning mechanisms, to ensure sustainable, safe ward care.</p>","PeriodicalId":520651,"journal":{"name":"International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13455353/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzag101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hospital ward strain occurs when care demands exceed available staffing, beds, and resources, posing a significant threat to safe inpatient care. While emergency department and intensive care settings have been extensively studied, ward-level pressures have received less attention, particularly from the perspectives of patients and frontline staff. This review aimed to synthesize current evidence on how hospital ward strain is experienced by staff and patients, and its implications for care quality, safety, and workforce sustainability.

Methods: A mixed methods systematic review was conducted on patient and staff perspectives on hospital ward strain. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and HMIC were searched for empirical studies published from January 2000 to March 2025. Three reviewers screened titles and abstracts in pairs; full-text assessment was conducted by one reviewer with independent verification of a random 20% sample. The Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess methodological quality. Findings were analysed using Donabedian's Structure-Process-Outcome (SPO) model and Hollnagel's Resilience framework.

Results: Of 9,943 studies identified, 16 observational and non-randomized studies met the inclusion criteria, representing diverse healthcare settings across multiple countries. Most studies (87.5%) focused exclusively on staff perspectives; only two included patient experiences. Structural pressures (inadequate staffing, bed capacity constraints) consistently led to process failures (care delays, missed care, coordination breakdowns), resulting in burnout, turnover, quality and safety trade-offs, and compromised patient safety. Ward resilience was mainly reactive: respond and monitor were evident, but anticipate and learn, were mostly absent. Patient acuity was inconsistently reported, limiting cross-study comparison.

Conclusion: Ward strain is a systemic patient safety issue requiring structural solutions beyond staff resilience. Patient perspectives remain underrepresented and must be prioritized in future research. Policymakers should invest in anticipatory and learning resilience capacities through workforce planning, real-time monitoring, and formal learning mechanisms, to ensure sustainable, safe ward care.

患者和工作人员对医院病房压力的看法及其对患者护理和劳动力的影响:一项混合方法的系统回顾。
背景:当护理需求超过可用的人员、床位和资源时,医院病房压力就会发生,对住院病人的安全护理构成重大威胁。虽然急诊科和重症监护环境已被广泛研究,但病房水平的压力受到的关注较少,特别是从患者和一线工作人员的角度来看。本综述旨在综合目前的证据,了解医院病房的工作人员和患者是如何经历压力的,以及它对护理质量、安全性和劳动力可持续性的影响。方法:采用混合方法对患者和工作人员对病房菌株的看法进行系统评价。检索了MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO和HMIC从2000年1月到2025年3月发表的实证研究。三名审稿人成对筛选标题和摘要;全文评估由一名审稿人进行,并对随机抽取的20%样本进行独立验证。使用混合方法评估工具评估方法学质量。研究结果采用Donabedian的结构-过程-结果(SPO)模型和Hollnagel的弹性框架进行分析。结果:在确定的9943项研究中,16项观察性和非随机研究符合纳入标准,代表了多个国家的不同医疗保健环境。大多数研究(87.5%)只关注员工的观点;只有两项包括了病人的经历。结构性压力(人员配备不足、床位容量限制)一直导致流程失败(护理延误、错过护理、协调中断),导致工作倦怠、人员流失、质量和安全权衡以及患者安全受损。病房弹性主要是反应性的:反应和监测明显,但预测和学习大多不存在。患者的视力报告不一致,限制了交叉研究的比较。结论:病房应变是一个系统性的患者安全问题,需要结构性的解决方案,而不是工作人员的应变能力。患者的观点仍然没有得到充分的代表,在未来的研究中必须优先考虑。政策制定者应通过劳动力规划、实时监测和正式学习机制,投资于预期和学习弹性能力,以确保可持续、安全的病房护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书