Background This study was based on the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses’ (AACNs’) interest in determining the value and influence of specialty certification.

Background/Objectives: Job satisfaction is crucial for healthcare professionals, and understanding its influencing factors is essential for fostering a positive work environment, reducing turnover rates, and improving the overall quality of patient care. This systematic review examined the factors linked to nurse job satisfaction in psychiatric hospitals and diverse psychiatric settings, analyzing the findings through the lens of Herzberg’s theory. Despite existing evidence, gaps remain in understanding the differences in factors affecting job satisfaction across various settings. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review by searching six databases, namely PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, and APA PsycNet. Our search yielded an initial 567 studies published between January 2014 and February 2024, which were subsequently screened and evaluated based on predetermined inclusion criteria. Following this process, a total of 16 studies were deemed eligible for final analysis. Each of these selected studies underwent an independent review by two authors, utilizing the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist tool to ensure rigorous assessment. Results: The findings revealed that interpersonal relationships, working conditions, and recognition were the most frequently reported factors associated with nurse job satisfaction, along with various extrinsic, intrinsic, personal, emotional, and psychosocial factors. Notably, psychiatric hospitals showed a mix of personal, extrinsic, intrinsic, and psychosocial factors influencing job satisfaction, with demographic factors being the most frequently examined. In contrast, diverse psychiatric settings focused more on external aspects impacting job satisfaction. Conclusions: The review highlights the importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors and suggests that future research should employ more robust methods and consider psychiatric hospitals and other mental health contexts. Herzberg’s theory provides a valuable framework for understanding the factors associated with nurse job satisfaction.

Studies have found race-related stress psychologically and physiologically harms members of stigmatized racial groups. However, the stressor is racism, not race. This study examined the relationship between racism-related stress and psychological resilience in Black/African American nurses. This study used a cross-sectional, quantitative, correlational design with two instruments, an investigator-developed demographic questionnaire and a convenience sample. Participants perceived they have low psychological resilience in stressful situations. With racism-related stress, in particular, participants perceived they are affected by both lived and vicarious racism - ruminating over past occurrences, and expecting/worrying that racism will happen to them or other Black/African American people. There was a significant positive correlation between participants' perceived psychological resilience, their ability to assess the nature of the racism-related stressor and their ability to mitigate its harmful effects by identifying and utilizing their coping resources. There was a negative correlation between racism-related stress and psychological resilience. There is a need for continued research on racism-related stress among Black/African American nurses. Further, healthcare organizations, advisably through their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, must develop systemic approaches to meeting the unique needs of the Black/African American workforce.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine relationships between moral injury (MI), well-being, and resilience among staff nurses and nurse leaders practicing during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic. BACKGROUND: Attention to MI among health professionals, including nurses, increased in 2021, particularly related to the pandemic. Few studies examined MI, well-being, and resilience; even fewer provided implications for leadership/management. METHODS: The sample included 676 RNs practicing in Ohio. The electronic survey included assessments of MI, well-being, and resilience distributed via the Ohio Nurses Association and the schools of nursing alumni Listservs. RESULTS: There was a significant association between MI and negative well-being and negative association between MI and resilience. Differences were observed between staff nurses and leaders. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study relating MI, resilience, and well-bring among nurses and nurse leaders during the pandemic. There is a need for additional research to further our understanding about nurses' health and well-being during the pandemic and beyond.