Show simple item record

dc.contributorWichita State University. School of Nursingen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcHugh, Mary L.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-28T20:26:02Z
dc.date.available2012-02-28T20:26:02Z
dc.date.issued1997-11en_US
dc.identifier9416095en_US
dc.identifier8404213en_US
dc.identifier.citationNursing economic$. 1997 Nov-Dec; 15(6): 294-300.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0746-1739en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA20154028&v=2.1&u=ksstate_wichita&it=r&p=PPNU&sw=wen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10057/4519
dc.descriptionThe full text of this article is not available in SOAR. WSU users can access the article via commercial databases licensed by University Libraries: http://libcat.wichita.edu/vwebv/holdingsInfo?bibId=1332111. The URL of this article is: http://go.galegroupen_US
dc.description.abstractThis study evaluated costs and staffing balance outcomes comparing unrestricted unit floating (UUF) with cluster [by related patient population or technical requirements] unit floating (CUF) practices. Researchers used a computer simulation model with data from a 400 bed VA hospital. Literature suggested a high nurse turnover rate associated with dissatisfaction engendered by forced floating to unfamiliar units. Direct wage cost differences were negligible when UUF and CUF floating patterns were compared, so absolute costs were not the defining issue. UUF staffing patterns produced significantly fewer understaffed shifts (by nursing hours) than CUF floating permitted. The essential quality of care trade-off is between the UUF pattern that provided sufficient nursing hours of care vs. the CUF pattern that provided less absolute availability in hours of nursing care, but a better oriented staff. The author suggests seeking staff input when deciding which of these two floating patterns would be most acceptable in a particular institution.en_US
dc.format.extent294-300en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherJannetti Publicationsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesNursing Economicsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesNurs Econen_US
dc.sourceNLMen_US
dc.subjectComparative Studyen_US
dc.subject.meshClinical Competenceen_US
dc.subject.meshComputer Simulationen_US
dc.subject.meshCost-Benefit Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshHospital Units/organization & administrationen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshJob Satisfactionen_US
dc.subject.meshNursing Administration Researchen_US
dc.subject.meshNursing Staff, Hospital/educationen_US
dc.subject.meshOutcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)en_US
dc.subject.meshPersonnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administrationen_US
dc.subject.meshPersonnel Turnoveren_US
dc.subject.meshQuality of Health Careen_US
dc.subject.meshNursing Staff, Hospital/organization & administrationen_US
dc.subject.meshNursing Staff, Hospital/psychologyen_US
dc.titleCost-effectiveness of clustered unit vs. unclustered nurse floatingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.coverage.spacialUnited Statesen_US
dc.description.versionpeer revieweden_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright © Jannetti Publicationsen_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record