Background: No systematic review in the literature has analyzed the intensity and frequency of moral distress among ICU nurses. No study seems to have mapped the leading personal and professional characteristics associated with high levels of moral distress. This systematic review aimed to describe the intensity and frequency of moral distress experienced by nurses in ICUs, as assessed by Corley’s instruments on moral distress (the Moral Distress Scale and the Moral Distress Scale–Revised). Additionally, this systematic review aimed to summarize the correlates of moral distress. Methods: A systematic search and review were performed using the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed), and Psychological Abstracts Information Services (PsycINFO). The review methodology followed PRISMA guidelines. The quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Findings showed a moderate level of moral distress among nurses working in ICUs. The findings of this systematic review confirm that there are a lot of triggers of moral distress related to patient-level factors, unit/team-level factors, or system-level causes. Beyond the triggers of moral distress, this systematic review showed some correlates of moral distress: those nurses working in ICUs with less work experience and those who are younger, female, and intend to leave their jobs have higher levels of moral distress. This systematic review’s findings show a positive correlation between professional autonomy, empowerment, and moral distress scores. Additionally, nurses who feel supported by head nurses report lower moral distress scores. Conclusions: This review could help better identify which professionals are at a higher risk of experiencing moral distress, allowing the early detection of those at risk of moral distress, and giving the organization some tools to implement preventive strategies.

The aim was to describe which elements of nurses' knowledge, training needs, behavior, and attitude can prevent Medication errors (Acronym MEs) in the emergency department during all steps of the administration of intravenous (IV) medications. An anonymous questionnaire made up of 43 items has been drafted and delivered to a sample of 103 nurses of a university hospital in Rome. The study has been supported by specific literature review. Majority of the sample (94%) answered that topics related to the preparation and administration of IV medications were covered during the basic course while 63.2% only during the postbasic course. Only 15.6% of nurses judged excellent their level of knowledge about preparation and administration of IV medications while 89.3% considered that it is important to improve their knowledge; 85.6% said that the teaching about the use of IV medications should be increased during the degree course they attended; 30.3% agreed that specific postgraduate courses on the use of IV drugs should be designed. Moreover, only 22% of the sample believed that the coaching of new recruit nurses is critical to prevent errors. The sample showed appropriate knowledge, positive attitudes, and right behavior related to the preparation and administration of IV medications. The skills that nurses must have in pharmacology are still rising, both due to the safety of drug therapy and to the increasing number of drugs available; the result is that nurses have to update their knowledge regularly.

Background: Since 1997, nursing ethics research has focused on solving ethical dilemmas, enhancing decision-making strategies, and introducing professional education. Few studies describe the triggers of ethical dilemmas among primary care nurses. The aim of this study was to explore the moral distress and ethical dilemmas among primary care nurses. Methods: A scoping review was performed following Arskey and O’Malley’s framework. PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, and Scopus were searched systematically to retrieve relevant titles and abstracts. A temporal filter was applied to focus on the most recent literature (years of 2010–2020). The research was completed on 17 November 2020. Results: Of 184 articles retrieved, 15 were included in the review. Some (n = 7) studies had a qualitative design, and the most productive country was Brazil (n = 7). The total number of nurses involved in quantitative studies was 1137 (range: 36–433); the total number of nurses involved in qualitative studies was 144 (range: 7–73). Three main focus areas were identified: (a) frequent ethical conflicts and moral distress episodes among nurses working in primary care settings; (b) frequent moral distress measures here employed; (c) coping strategies here adopted to prevent or manage moral distress. Conclusion: Further research is needed to examine the differences between moral distress triggers and sources of ethical dilemmas among the different care environments, such as primary care and acute care settings.