Moral Distress Scores of Nurses Working in Intensive Care Units for Adults Using Corley's Scale: A Systematic Review.
ethical conflict
health professionals
moral courage
moral distress
nurses
nursing
systematic review
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 08 2022
26 08 2022
Historique:
received:
17
07
2022
revised:
22
08
2022
accepted:
23
08
2022
entrez:
9
9
2022
pubmed:
10
9
2022
medline:
14
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
No systematic review in the literature has analyzed the intensity and frequency of moral distress among ICU nurses. No study seems to have mapped the leading personal and professional characteristics associated with high levels of moral distress. This systematic review aimed to describe the intensity and frequency of moral distress experienced by nurses in ICUs, as assessed by Corley's instruments on moral distress (the Moral Distress Scale and the Moral Distress Scale-Revised). Additionally, this systematic review aimed to summarize the correlates of moral distress. A systematic search and review were performed using the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed), and Psychological Abstracts Information Services (PsycINFO). The review methodology followed PRISMA guidelines. The quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Findings showed a moderate level of moral distress among nurses working in ICUs. The findings of this systematic review confirm that there are a lot of triggers of moral distress related to patient-level factors, unit/team-level factors, or system-level causes. Beyond the triggers of moral distress, this systematic review showed some correlates of moral distress: those nurses working in ICUs with less work experience and those who are younger, female, and intend to leave their jobs have higher levels of moral distress. This systematic review's findings show a positive correlation between professional autonomy, empowerment, and moral distress scores. Additionally, nurses who feel supported by head nurses report lower moral distress scores. This review could help better identify which professionals are at a higher risk of experiencing moral distress, allowing the early detection of those at risk of moral distress, and giving the organization some tools to implement preventive strategies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
No systematic review in the literature has analyzed the intensity and frequency of moral distress among ICU nurses. No study seems to have mapped the leading personal and professional characteristics associated with high levels of moral distress. This systematic review aimed to describe the intensity and frequency of moral distress experienced by nurses in ICUs, as assessed by Corley's instruments on moral distress (the Moral Distress Scale and the Moral Distress Scale-Revised). Additionally, this systematic review aimed to summarize the correlates of moral distress.
METHODS
A systematic search and review were performed using the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed), and Psychological Abstracts Information Services (PsycINFO). The review methodology followed PRISMA guidelines. The quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
Findings showed a moderate level of moral distress among nurses working in ICUs. The findings of this systematic review confirm that there are a lot of triggers of moral distress related to patient-level factors, unit/team-level factors, or system-level causes. Beyond the triggers of moral distress, this systematic review showed some correlates of moral distress: those nurses working in ICUs with less work experience and those who are younger, female, and intend to leave their jobs have higher levels of moral distress. This systematic review's findings show a positive correlation between professional autonomy, empowerment, and moral distress scores. Additionally, nurses who feel supported by head nurses report lower moral distress scores.
CONCLUSIONS
This review could help better identify which professionals are at a higher risk of experiencing moral distress, allowing the early detection of those at risk of moral distress, and giving the organization some tools to implement preventive strategies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36078353
pii: ijerph191710640
doi: 10.3390/ijerph191710640
pmc: PMC9517876
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Med Lav. 2018 Feb 06;109(2):97-109
pubmed: 29701626
Can J Crit Care Nurs. 2016 Jan;27(4):27-36
pubmed: 29786979
Acta Biomed. 2021 Oct 05;92(S6):e2021461
pubmed: 34739455
Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2014 Jul-Aug;33(4):234-45
pubmed: 24895954
Nurs Ethics. 2020 Feb;27(1):40-52
pubmed: 30966867
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Mar;26(2):434-442
pubmed: 28573927
J Forensic Nurs. 2019 Jul/Sep;15(3):133-142
pubmed: 31436681
J Crit Care. 2019 Apr;50:122-125
pubmed: 30530263
Ann Intensive Care. 2017 Dec;7(1):71
pubmed: 28639161
Int J Nurs Sci. 2018 Mar 29;5(2):121-125
pubmed: 31406813
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Nov;111:103767
pubmed: 32956930
Indian J Med Ethics. 2019 Jan-Mar;4(1):20-25
pubmed: 30473492
J Health Psychol. 2017 Jan;22(1):51-67
pubmed: 26220460
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2016 Apr;33:12-20
pubmed: 26796289
Intensive Care Med. 2016 Oct;42(10):1615-1617
pubmed: 27480316
Am J Crit Care. 1995 Jul;4(4):280-5
pubmed: 7663591
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71
pubmed: 33782057
J Nurs Manag. 2017 Sep;25(6):477-485
pubmed: 27726233
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Apr;120:94-103
pubmed: 31866469
Am J Crit Care. 2012 Mar;21(2):e41-52
pubmed: 22381995
Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2020 Nov;2:100007
pubmed: 33073251
Bioethics. 2015 Feb;29(2):91-7
pubmed: 24602097
Nurs Ethics. 2018 Nov;25(7):906-917
pubmed: 27928069
Nurs Ethics. 2020 May;27(3):778-795
pubmed: 31750780
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Dec 03;9(12):
pubmed: 34946401
J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2018 Mar 7;11:2
pubmed: 30258552
Nurs Ethics. 2005 Jul;12(4):381-90
pubmed: 16045246
Nurs Ethics. 2017 Mar;24(2):209-224
pubmed: 26208720
J Adv Nurs. 2001 Jan;33(2):250-6
pubmed: 11168709
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2016 Oct;36:42-8
pubmed: 27209561
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Jun;26(4):1101-1113
pubmed: 27312198
Scand J Caring Sci. 2022 Mar;36(1):142-149
pubmed: 33751624
Am J Crit Care. 2018 Jul;27(4):295-302
pubmed: 29961665
J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care. 2018 Jan-Mar;14(1):44-72
pubmed: 29488856
HEC Forum. 2017 Jun;29(2):127-143
pubmed: 28070806
Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Sep 30;9(10):
pubmed: 34682986
J Crit Care. 2016 Feb;31(1):178-82
pubmed: 26596697
Am J Crit Care. 2005 Nov;14(6):523-30
pubmed: 16249589
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018 Apr;24(4):849-860
pubmed: 29196079
J Adv Nurs. 2018 Nov;74(11):2685-2700
pubmed: 30019353
J Adv Nurs. 2013 Jan;69(1):167-74
pubmed: 22607094
Int Nurs Rev. 2021 Jun;68(2):181-188
pubmed: 33615479
Nurs Crit Care. 2022 Mar;27(2):204-213
pubmed: 33063374
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Mar;26(2):346-356
pubmed: 28718349
Acta Biomed. 2022 Mar 14;93(1):e2022010
pubmed: 35315389
J Health Psychol. 2020 Oct;25(12):1894-1904
pubmed: 29921136
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 25;11(1):e0147601
pubmed: 26808317
J Adv Nurs. 2013 Feb;69(2):415-24
pubmed: 22550945
BMC Public Health. 2013 Feb 19;13:154
pubmed: 23421987