Objective: To explore nurses’ experiences and perceptions about prioritizations, omissions, and rationing of bedside nursing care. Methods: A total of 23 nurses participated in four focus groups. The interviews were based on a semi-structured interview guide; data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Findings: Four themes were developed based on the data: (a) priorities in the delivery of care; (b) professional roles, responsibilities, and role conflicts; (c) environmental factors influencing care omissions; and (d) perceived outcomes of rationing. Discussion: The delivery of nursing care is framed by the biomedical ethos and inter-professional role conflict while the standards of basic care are jeopardized. Organizational and environmental factors appear to exert significant influence on prioritization. Failure to carry out necessary nursing tasks may lead to adverse patient outcomes, role conflict, and an ethical burden on nurses. Conclusion: There is a need for further exploration and possible redesign of the nursing role, scope, and responsibilities, as well as addressing the arising ethical issues of rationing in nursing care.

Background: Previous research has linked missed nursing care to nurses’ work environment. Ethical climate is a part of work environment, but the relationship of missed care to different types of ethical climate is unknown. Research objectives: To describe the types of ethical climate in adult in-patient cancer care settings, and their relationship to missed nursing care. Research design: A descriptive correlation design was used. Data were collected using the Ethical Climate Questionnaire and the MISSCARE survey tool, and analyzed with descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation and analysis of variance. Participants and research context: All nurses from relevant units in the Republic of Cyprus were invited to participate. Ethical considerations: The research protocol has been approved according to national legislation, all licenses have been obtained, and respondents participated voluntarily after they have received all necessary information. Findings: Response rate was 91.8%. Five types identified were as follows: caring (M = 3.18, standard deviation = 1.39); law and code (M = 3.18, standard deviation = 0.96); rules (M = 3.17, standard deviation = 0.73); instrumental (M = 2.88, standard deviation = 1.34); and independence (M = 2.74, standard deviation = 0.94). Reported overall missed care (range: 1–5) was M = 2.51 (standard deviation = 0.90), and this was positively (p < 0.05) related to instrumental (r = 0.612) and independence (r = 0.461) types and negatively (p < 0.05) related to caring (r = −0.695), rules (r = −0.367), and law and code (r = −0.487). Discussion: The reported levels of missed care and the types of ethical climates present similarities and differences with the relevant literature. All types of ethical climate were related to the reported missed care. Conclusion: Efforts to reduce the influence of instrumental and independence types and fostering caring, law and code, and rules types might decrease missed nursing care. However, more robust evidence is needed.

Background: In the face of scarcity, nurses may inevitably delay or omit some nursing interventions and give priority to others. This increases the risk of adverse patient outcomes and threatens safety, quality, and dignity in care. However, it is not clear if there is an ethical element in nursing care rationing and how nurses experience the phenomenon in its ethical perspective. Objectives: The purpose was to synthesize studies that relate care rationing with the ethical perspectives of nursing, and find the deeper, moral meaning of this phenomenon. Research design: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies was used. Searching was based on guidelines suggested by Joana Brigs Institute, while the synthesis has drawn from the methodology described. Primary studies were sought from nine electronic databases and manual searches. The explicitness of reporting was assed using consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research. Nine studies involving 167 nurse participants were included. Synthesis resulted in 35 preliminary themes, 14 descriptive themes, and four analytical themes (professional challenges and moral dilemmas, dominating considerations, perception of a moral role, and experiences of the ethical effects of rationing). Discussion of relationships between themes revealed a new thematic framework. Ethical consideration: Every effort has been taken, for the thoroughness in searching and retrieving the primary studies of this synthesis, and in order for them to be treated accurately, fairly and honestly and without intentional misinterpretations of their findings. Discussion: Within limitations of scarcity, nurses face moral challenges and their decisions may jeopardize professional values, leading to role conflict, feelings of guilt, distress and difficulty in fulfilling a morally acceptable role. However, more research is needed to support certain relationships. Conclusions: Related literature is limited. The few studies found highlighted the essence of justice, equality in care and in values when prioritizing care—with little support to the ethical effects of rationing on nurses. Further research on ethical dimension of care rationing may illuminate other important aspects of this phenomenon.