Building nurses’ resilience to complex and stressful practice environments is necessary to keep skilled nurses in the workplace and ensuring safe patient care. A unified theoretical framework titled Health Services Workplace Environmental Resilience Model (HSWERM), is presented to explain the environmental factors in the workplace that promote nurses’ resilience. The framework builds on a previously-published theoretical model of individual resilience, which identified the key constructs of psychological resilience as self-efficacy, coping and mindfulness, but did not examine environmental factors in the workplace that promote nurses’ resilience. This unified theoretical framework was developed using a literary synthesis drawing on data from international studies and literature reviews on the nursing workforce in hospitals. The most frequent workplace environmental factors were identified, extracted and clustered in alignment with key constructs for psychological resilience. Six major organizational concepts emerged that related to a positive resilience-building workplace and formed the foundation of the theoretical model. Three concepts related to nursing staff support (professional, practice, personal) and three related to nursing staff development (professional, practice, personal) within the workplace environment. The unified theoretical model incorporates these concepts within the workplace context, linking to the nurse, and then impacting on personal resilience and workplace outcomes, and its use has the potential to increase staff retention and quality of patient care.

Burnout is a significant problem affecting the nursing workforce and is associated with significant personal suffering and high rates of nurse turnover. Efforts to further understand the variables that explain burnout are needed. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine both environmental and individual factors that may explain burnout among nurses. We recruited 1848 Australian nurses to complete several online questionnaires measuring the practice environment (Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index), burnout (Professional Quality of Life Scale), trait negative affect (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory form Y2) and resilience (Connor Davidson Resilience Scale). Correlational analysis as well as hierarchical regression was used to determine the relative importance of variables in explaining burnout scores. All of the practice environment scales were significantly related to burnout in the negative direction, and these relationships were above .3 for all except the relationship scale (r = –.256) and the participation in hospital affairs scale (r = –.285). Overall, the regression model accounted for 62% of the variance in nurse burnout scores. Trait negative affect, resilience and two aspects of practice environment (Manager sub-scale and Staffing sub-scale) all explained significant variance in burnout scores. The largest contribution came from the two individual variables (resilience and trait negative affect) that together explained 55% of the variance in burnout scores. Findings suggest that health service administrators should provide nursing staff with education and support to build individual resilience. Workplaces that attend to staffing and resource issues and have managers who provide high levels of support to their staff appear to be essential strategies to help prevent nurse burnout.

Redesigning primary health services may enhance timely and effective uptake by men. The primary aim of this study was to assess the likelihood of Australian men attending a dedicated men’s health service (DMHS). The further aims were to better understand the reasons for their preferences and determine how health behaviours influence likelihood. A survey on health service use and preferences, health help-seeking behaviours, and the likelihood of attending a DMHS was administered by telephone to 1506 randomly selected men (median age 56 years, range 19–95). Likelihood of attending a DMHS was rated using a single item Likert scale where 0 was not at all likely and 10 highly likely. Respondents were classified by age (< or > = 65 years) and health status. Principal component analyses were used to define health behaviours, specifically help-seeking and delay/avoidance regarding visiting a doctor. Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses were used to examine predictors of likelihood of attending a DMHS. The mean likelihood of attending a DMHS was 5.8 (SD 3.3, median 6, moderate likelihood) and 21%, 26% and 23% of men rated likelihood as moderate, high and very high respectively. Being happy with their existing doctor was the most common reason (52%) for being less likely to attend a DMHS. In unadjusted analyses, younger men reported being more likely to attend a DMHS (p < 0.001) with older-sick men reporting being least likely (p < 0.001). Younger men were more likely than older men to score higher on delay/avoidance and were more likely to self-monitor. In the full model, men with current health concerns (p ≤ 0.01), who scored higher on delay/avoidance (p ≤ 0.0006), who were more likely to be information-seekers (p < 0.0001) and/or were motivated to change their health (p ≤ 0.0001) reported a higher likelihood of attending a DMHS irrespective of age and health status. Seventy percent of men reported a moderate or higher likelihood of attending a DMHS. As young healthy men are more likely than older men to display health behaviours that are associated with a higher likelihood of attending a DHMS, such as delay/avoidance, marketing a DMHS to such men may be of value.