4.5 Review

Nursing managers' experiences of facing the COVID-19 pandemic in their work: A systematic review

Journal

NURSING OPEN
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages 4185-4195

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/nop2.1694

Keywords

COVID-19; experience; nursing manager; systematic review

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review provides a comprehensive summary of nursing managers' experiences during the COVID-19 outbreak, based on published studies. The findings highlight the expanding and changing role of nursing managers, the importance of ensuring staff well-being, effective communication, support, and opportunities for development and learning. These results can be utilized to better prepare for future crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic.
AimThere is far little evidence available on nursing managers' experiences during this global crisis. This systematic review aimed to provide the first comprehensive summary of the findings of published studies describing data concerning nursing managers' experiences of the COVID-19 outbreak. DesignStudies published between January 2019 and the end of December 2021 were retrieved from CINAHL, Medline and PubMed databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was used to guide the search methodology. MethodsIn total, 14 relevant articles were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools and subjected to thematic content analysis. ResultsOur findings revealed five main themes describing nursing managers' experiences: an expanding and changing role, ensuring the well-being of staff, communication, support received, development and learning. Nursing managers found the task of operational management confusing, as objectives have been constantly changing as the pandemic has progressed. The results should be used in preparation for future crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available