Nurse Staffing Mandates Are Not a Silver Bullet
Mandatory nurse staffing opponents argue that ever-changing healthcare landscape requires hospitals to be "nimble and flexible" when it comes to staffing, and that such mandates would to lead to "negative consequences for nurses involving the equity, efficiency, and costs of producing nursing care in hospitals."
Proponents, such as National Nurses United, argue that Washington, DC, needs a law like the one in California, which "has dramatically improved patient safety, brought 130,000 additional nurses back to the bedside, and has helped keep experienced nurses taking care of patients." In DC, 57% of nurses say staffing is always or almost always inadequate there, according to NNU.
Although appropriate nurse staffing is critical, researchers seem to agree that more study is needed to determine whether mandates like the one being proposed in Washington, DC, actually cause improvements in patient care.
One scenario that would render such mandates and studies moot: If hospitals already had adequate nurse staffing.
Alexandra Wilson Pecci is a managing editor for HealthLeaders Media.
- 12 Hires to Keep Your Hospital Out of Trouble
- Meaningful Use Payment Adjustments Begin
- 'Mega Boards' Could be Rural Healthcare Disruptor
- Ratcheting Up Patient Experience Has a Downside
- HL20: Lee Aase—Who's Behind @MayoClinic
- 1 in 5 Eligible Hospitals Penalized for HACs
- HL20: Sam Foote, MD—The Courage to Speak Up
- HL20: Derek Angus, MD—An Intense Focus on Care
- HL20: Anne Wojcicki—Unlocking Consumer Access to Genetics
- Taming Time and Moving Healthcare Data