Adequate Staffing Saves Lives Even If It Costs More
An adequate nurse to patient ratio is a topic that is still currently being debated about. There are many articles and reviews out there about what is considered safe. Ultimately, who should be focused on more, the nurse, the patient, or both? What makes it so vital that there is adequate staffing? One reason for understaffing is to cut costs within the hospital. Assigning too many patients to one nurse is cost-effective. Could there be other avenues to take that the hospital could cut costs in, rather than making the patients and nurses suffer? Is there a particular unit that doesn’t need the amount of nurses they have and pull nurses from that unit to staff a shorthanded unit? Another way would be to limit the length of stays for each inpatient.
Staffing more RNs on the floors and units decreases hospital related illnesses and mortalities. Adding more RNs to the units gives them ample time to be with each of their patients, decreasing illnesses acquired in the hospital like pneumonia and respiratory failure. I came across an article that talked about when the amount of RNs decreased patients were at an increased risk for illnesses like cardiac arrest and hospital related deaths. The last and final article I discovered was one that discussed a nurse’s work environment and how that affects the patient’s safety.
There is a connection between how a nurse feels when she is at work, and patient safety. Due to high workloads adding extra stress for the individual and the quality of care she/he is giving to their patient, this in turn threatens that patient’s safety.
I believe in providing the safest environment for the patients. They are the reason that the nurses have jobs. Without the patients, there would be absolutely no reason for the nursing profession. Every nurse takes an oath to provide the best quality of care under their scope of practice to each and every patient assigned to them. If a hospital...