The association between nationality and nurse job satisfaction in Saudi Arabian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Job satisfaction is important for increasing nurse retention rates. However, there is little research examining whether there is an association between nationality and job satisfaction among nurses.

AIM

To examine whether there is an association between nationality and nurse job satisfaction.

METHODS/DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey design was utilized, and 743 nurses from three major government hospitals in Saudi Arabia participated in the survey. Job satisfaction was measured using McCloskey/Mueller Satisfaction Scale. Data were collected between May 2014 and February 2015.

RESULTS

Compared with Saudi nurses, expatriate nurses had overall lower job satisfaction after controlling for other predictors. While expatriates were less satisfied than Saudi nurses about extrinsic rewards and family-work balance, however, Saudi nurses were less satisfied than expatriate nurses about their professional opportunities, praise and recognition, and co-worker relationships.

CONCLUSION

For some subscales, Saudi nurses were more satisfied than expatriate nurses, while for other subscales, the opposite was true. Nationality should be included in job satisfaction studies in countries with migrant workforces, as nationality-based differences may have been present but masked in earlier international studies by aggregating satisfaction across national groups.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING & HEALTH POLICY

Policy makers in Saudi Arabia and other countries with migrant nursing workforces should have effective induction programmes that help newly employed nurses - migrant and local - clearly understand their jobs, roles and responsibilities. Policy makers must have sufficient evidence to modify the reward system to ensure fairness and equality for all.

Optimising and profiling pre-implementation contexts to create and implement a public health network intervention for tackling loneliness

Background

The implementation of complex interventions experiences challenges that affect the extent to which they become embedded and scaled-up. Implementation at scale in complex environments like community settings defies universal replication. Planning for implementation in such environments requires knowledge of organisational capacity and structure. Pre-implementation work is an important element of the early phase of preparing the setting for the introduction of an intervention, and the factors contributing towards the creation of an optimal pre-implementation community context are under-acknowledged.

Methods

To explore the factors contributing towards the creation of an optimal pre-implementation context, a quasi-ethnographic approach was taken. The implementation of a social network intervention designed to tackle loneliness in a community setting acts as the case in example. Observations (of meetings), interviews (with community partners) and documentary analysis (national and local policy documents and intervention resources) were conducted. Layder’s adaptive theory approach was taken to data analysis, with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and a typology of third-sector organisations used to interpret the findings.

Results

Community settings were found to sit along a continuum with three broad categories defined as Fully Professionalised Organisations; Aspirational Community, Voluntary and Social Enterprises; and Non-Professionalised Community-Based Groups. The nature of an optimal pre-implementation context varied across these settings. Using the CFIR, the results illustrate that some settings were more influenced by political landscape (Fully professional and Aspirational setting) and others more influenced by their founding values and ethos (Non-Professionalised Community-Based settings). Readiness was achieved at different speeds across the categories with those settings with more resource availability more able to achieve readiness (Fully Professional settings), and others requiring flexibility in the intervention to help overcome limited resource availability (Aspirational and Non-Professionalised Community-Based settings).

Conclusions

The CFIR is useful in highlighting the multiple facets at play in creating the optimal pre-implementation context, and where flex is required to achieve this. The CFIR illuminates the similarities and differences between and across settings, highlighting the complexity of open system settings and the important need for pre-implementation work.

Trial registration

ISRCTN19193075

Comorbidities and their link with individual health status: A cross-sectional analysis of 23,892 people with knee and hip osteoarthritis from primary care

Objectives:

Robust data on the impact of comorbidities on health in people with osteoarthritis (OA) are lacking, despite its potential importance for patient management. Objectives were to determine coexisting conditions in people with OA in primary care and whether more comorbidities were linked with individual health status.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of 23,892 patients with knee and hip OA was conducted to determine comorbidities present (number/clusters) and how these linked with pain intensity (0–100), widespread pain (site numbers), medication usage (paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids), quality of life EuroQol five dimension scale (EQ-5D), and physical function (walking speed) using independent t-tests or χ² test.

Results:

Sixty-two percent of people with OA treated in primary care had at least one comorbidity; hypertension (37%), heart disease (8%), and diabetes (7%) being most common. Outcome measures worsened with more comorbidities (0–4+ comorbidities); pain intensity [mean (SD)] 46(22)–57(21); number of painful sites 3.7(3.0)–6.3(5.4); quality of life 0.73(0.10)–0.63(0.15); walking speed 1.57 m/s (0.33)–1.24 m/s (0.31), while the proportion of people using pain medication increased from 0 to 2 comorbidities (58–69%; p < 0.001), with an increase in opioid use from 4.6% to 19.5% with more comorbidities (0–4+ comorbidities).

Conclusion:

Most people with knee or hip OA in primary care have at least one other long-term condition. A greater number of comorbidities is linked with worsening health, highlighting the importance of screening for comorbidities when treating patients with OA. It is important for clinicians to consider how OA treatments will interact and affect other common comorbidities.