Well-being of healthcare professionals (HCPs) is vital for care quality, staff retention and overall healthcare system effectiveness. This study aims to identify the organisational and workplace variables associated with sick leave and measures of engagement of HCPs on department level within a single Dutch academic hospital.
Cross-sectional study using routinely collected organisational data.
A tertiary-care academic hospital in the Netherlands.
25 clinical departments were included. Department level variables were derived from routinely collected hospital databases. Availability of data varied across variables. Analysis included information on patient population, human resources, care processes, quality of care and employee and patient experiences to assess differences, correlations and predictors for sick leave and engagement.
Primary outcome measures were (1) sick leave (%) and (2) engagement, assessed through two staff-survey items (vitality and connectedness; 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale). Both outcomes were analysed at department level.
Employee population data showed the most consistent patterns across analyses. Departments with higher staffing capacity had higher sick leave and lower engagement in group comparisons (p=0.009, p=0.030, respectively). In multivariable models, higher staffing capacity remained associated with increased sick leave (B=1.38, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.23, p=0.003). Engagement was positively associated with higher inflow (B=0.92, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.77, p=0.037) and negatively associated with outflow (B = –1.36, 95% CI –2.08 to –0.63, p=0.001). No consistent associations were found with patient population and patient experience measures.
Workforce-related factors, particularly staffing capacity and inflow and outflow, are strongly linked to sick leave and engagement. Routinely collected hospital data can be used to identify at-risk departments and inform targeted strategies for improving workforce sustainability. Future studies should explore more granular, team-level data to better support staff well-being and care quality.
To test the agreement and usability of a novel quality appraisal tool: A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews of Prognostic Factor studies (AMSTAR-PF).
Observational study.
14 appraisers of varied experience levels and backgrounds, including undergraduate, master’s and PhD students, postgraduate researchers, research fellows and clinicians.
Eight systematic reviews were rated by all reviewers using AMSTAR-PF.
Planned measures included intrapair and inter-pair agreement using Cohen’s and Fleiss’ kappa, time of use and time to reach consensus. Interrater agreement was an added measure, and Gwet’s agreement coefficient was calculated and presented due to its greater stability across agreement levels. The percentage of intrapair agreements identical or one category apart was also presented.
Interrater agreement averaged 0.59 (range 0.21–0.90), inter-pair agreement 0.61 (range 0.24–0.91) and intrapair agreement 0.75 (range 0.45–0.95) across the domains, with agreement for the overall rating 0.46 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) for interrater agreement, 0.46 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.74) for inter-pair agreement and 0.68 (range of averages 0.22–1.00) for intrapair agreement. The majority (60.7%) of intrapair ratings were identical, with 94.6% of final ratings either identical or only one category different for the overall appraisal. The time taken to appraise a study with AMSTAR-PF improved with use and averaged around 34 min after the first two appraisals.
Despite some variance in agreement for different domains and between different appraisers, the testing results suggest that AMSTAR-PF has clear utility for appraising the quality of systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies.
The study aims to evaluate the cost of managing psoriasis and its comorbidities across multiple medical departments and to identify cost determinants based on patient, disease and treatment characteristics. Additionally, it compares the cost of care with reimbursements under the fee-for-service (FFS) system to assess how well they reflect patient-specific care needs.
Seven-step, time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) analysis based on direct observations and interviews to generate patient-level cost estimates over the full cycle of care for participants prospectively enrolled in a clinical trial.
An integrated practice unit (IPU) at a Belgian University Hospital, centred around the treatment of psoriasis, including the management of associated comorbidities.
A total of 52 patients meeting the trial’s inclusion criteria, enrolled between January 2023 and November 2023, undergoing treatment within the IPU.
The individual cost of care over a 6-month period ranged from 169.78 to 1454.97, highlighting significant variability. Major cost drivers included mental health status and disease severity. Additionally, the presence of one or more comorbidities had a substantial impact on care costs, affecting not only expenses directly related to comorbidity management but often also those associated with dermatological care. Finally, a comparison between the TD-ABC cost variability and reimbursement tariffs variability revealed disparities, indicating that current tariffs do not sufficiently account for patient-specific cost differences.
Healthcare delivery and costing studies often adopt a fragmented approach, limiting cost insights into the full cycle of care for a medical condition. The TD-ABC methodology can address this gap by generating detailed, patient-level cost estimates for both primary illness management and related comorbidities. Our findings underscore the importance of including comorbidity-related costs when discussing a condition’s overall economic burden while also revealing significant cost variability among patients with the same disease. Notably, these variations are not sufficiently addressed by the current FFS reimbursement system.
NCT05480917 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
Maintaining a healthy workforce is crucial for safe, high-quality care. To enhance well-being and engagement in Dutch university medical centres (UMCs), an overview of staff well-being and job perceptions is needed first. Surveys are widely used to improve working conditions, but varying questionnaires hinder a comprehensive view. This study aimed to evaluate the content of employee surveys currently used in UMCs in the Netherlands from a well-being perspective and to analyse the survey results at a national level.
All seven UMCs were approached to participate in the study and share employee survey data. The primary outcome of interest is work experience; a secondary analysis was conducted. Items were categorised following the Job Demands-Resources model. Descriptive statistics were presented as percentages, means and medians with IQRs.
Two UMCs participated and 31 862 completed surveys were included. Variation in survey items (eg, 15–18 subcategories, 21–33 question items), response options (eg, 1–5, 1–10), frequency (1–3 times per year) and timing were found. Scores on the following outcomes are presented: work overload, coworker support, job control, organisational justice, participation in decision-making, performance feedback, possibilities for learning and development, recognition, task variety, team atmosphere, team effectiveness, trust in leadership, other job resources, connecting/inspiring leadership, self-efficacy, goal-directiveness, boredom, burnout, job satisfaction, work engagement, other employee well-being, commitment organisation/team and work ability. Results should be interpreted with caution, and solely found for hospital A, for certain job control items, median scores of 2 or 3 were observed, whereas the majority of other question items revealed a median score of 4.
There is a significant lack of cohesion across employee surveys. As it stands, employee surveys in Dutch UMCs are not effective tools for monitoring the work experience or well-being of the healthcare workforce. While these surveys may support management decisions, this support is not reflected in interventions related to work and the work environment.