Background: Nurses are pivotal in the provision of high quality care in acute hospitals. However, the optimal dosing of the number of nurses caring for patients remains elusive. In light of this, an updated review of the evidence on the effect of nurse staffing levels on patient outcomes is required. Aim: To undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the association between nurse staffing levels and nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units. Methods: Nine electronic databases were searched for English articles published between 2006 and 2017. The primary outcomes were nurse-sensitive patient outcomes. Results: Of 3429 unique articles identified, 35 met the inclusion criteria. All were cross-sectional and the majority utilised large administrative databases. Higher staffing levels were associated with reduced mortality, medication errors, ulcers, restraint use, infections, pneumonia, higher aspirin use and a greater number of patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention within 90 minutes. A meta-analysis involving 175,755 patients, from six studies, admitted to the intensive care unit and/or cardiac/cardiothoracic units showed that a higher nurse staffing level decreased the risk of inhospital mortality by 14% (0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.79–0.94). However, the meta-analysis also showed high heterogeneity (I²=86%). Conclusion: Nurse-to-patient ratios influence many patient outcomes, most markedly inhospital mortality. More studies need to be conducted on the association of nurse-to-patient ratios with nurse-sensitive patient outcomes to offset the paucity and weaknesses of research in this area. This would provide further evidence for recommendations of optimal nurse-to-patient ratios in acute specialist units.

Hospital admissions for heart failure are predicted to rise substantially over the next decade placing increasing pressure on the health care system. There is an urgent need to redesign systems of care for heart failure to improve evidence-based practice and create seamless transitions through the continuum of care. The aim of the review was to examine systems of care for heart failure that reduce hospital readmissions and/or mortality. Electronic databases searched were: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, grey literature, reviewed bibliographies and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials, non-randomised trials and cohort studies from 1st January 2008 to 4th August 2015. Inclusion criteria for studies were: English language, randomised controlled trials, non-randomised trials and cohort studies of systems of care for patients diagnosed with heart failure and aimed at reducing hospital readmissions and/or mortality. Three reviewer authors independently assessed articles for eligibility based on title and abstract and then full-text. Quality of evidence was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomised trials and GRADE rating tool for randomised controlled trials. We included 29 articles reporting on systems of care in the workforce, primary care, in-hospital, transitional care, outpatients and telemonitoring. Several studies found that access to a specialist heart failure team/service reduced hospital readmissions and mortality. In primary care, a collaborative model of care where the primary physician shared the care with a cardiologist, improved patient outcomes compared to a primary physician only. During hospitalisation, quality improvement programs improved the quality of inpatient care resulting in reduced hospital readmissions and mortality. In the transitional care phase, heart failure programs, nurse-led clinics, and early outpatient follow-up reduced hospital readmissions. There was a lack of evidence as to the efficacy of telemonitoring with many studies finding conflicting evidence. Redesigning systems of care aimed at improving the translation of evidence into clinical practice and transitional care can potentially improve patient outcomes in a cohort of patients known for high readmission rates and mortality.