Reliability and Validity of the Malay Version of Mindful Organizing Scale Amongst Nursing Staff

Aim: This study tested the reliability and validity of the 9-item Mindful organizing scale and safety performance scale in the sample of private hospital nurses in different states of Malaysia. Methods: Mindful Organizing scale and safety behavior scale were translated into Bahasa Malaya. To accomplish this task, the survey was conducted of 475 registered nursing staff in different states of Malaysia in 2020 through a self-administered questionnaire. For convergent and discriminant validity of our research variables, we used the Structural equation modeling (SEM) technique with the help of SPSS AMOS 21. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability analysis, and analysis of aggregation through intra-class correlation coefficients indices were also carried out. Results: Our results testified the unidimensional structure of the mindful organizing scale as well as for safety performance both indicators, and exhibited satisfactory internal consistency for both mindful organizing and safety performance. Also, the aggregation of scores to the team level was well under the prescribed limit. Conclusions: We are confident to establish that the Malay version of the mindful organizing and safety performance scales has shown to be a reliable and valid measure that can measure collective mindfulness and safety behavior amongst nursing staff. Our translated version can be used in other high-reliability organizations (HROs) in this cultural context and other industries that also want to achieve reliability in their operational performance.

Agility and Safety Performance among Nurses: The Mediating Role of Mindful Organizing

This study aimed to assess the impact of workforce agility on private hospital nursing staff’s safety behavior with the mediating role of mindful organizing. This study was cross-sectional. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 369 nursing staff. The structural equation modeling (SEM) technique was used to check the internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and hypotheses testing. For mediation analysis, the bootstrapping technique was used. Our findings suggested that workforce agility is the possible predictor of mindful organizing, as all of these dimensions have a positive impact on mindful organizing. Reference to safety performance sub-dimensions, proactivity, adaptability, and resilience had a positive significant impact on (a) safety compliance, and proactivity had a positive impact on (b) safety participation. Further, mindful organizing was also found to be positively associated with safety performance. Evidence for mediation between workforce agility and safety performance was also observed. Proactivity, adaptability, and resilience can enhance safety performance for the nursing staff. Workforce agility can also help the organization to attain mindful organizing, which will help them to achieve operational excellence, whereas in the past, high-reliability organizations were mainly found practicing mindful organizing. This study demonstrated the key impact of workforce agility and mindful organizing on safety behaviors directly and indirectly.

Mindful organizing as a healthcare strategy to decrease catheter-associated infections in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units. A systematic review and grading recommendations (GRADE) system

Purpose: To explore the clinical evidence available on mindful organizing (MO) that will improve teamwork for positioning and managing central venous catheters in patients admitted to neonatal intensive care and other pediatric intensive care units to decrease central-line-associated and catheter-related bloodstream infections (CLABSI and CRBSI). Methods: We searched several databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science) up to June 2018. We included studies investigating the effectiveness of MO teamwork in reducing CLABSI and CRBSI. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. We used validated appraisal checklists to assess quality. Results: Seven studies were included: only one was a non-randomized case-controlled trial (CCT). All the others had a pre-post intervention design, one a time-series design and one an interrupted time-series design. The methodological heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis. Despite the low certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, three studies including thousands of participants provided numerical data for calculating risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing MO with no intervention for decreasing the CLABSI rate in neonatal and pediatric ICUs. The one CCT disclosed no significant difference in the CLABSI rate decrease between groups (RR = 0.96; 95%CI 0.47–1.97). Nor did the pre- and post-intervention interrupted time-series design disclose a significant decrease (RR = 0.80; 95%CI 0.36 1.77). In the study using a before-after study design, the GRADE system found that the CLABSI rate decrease differed significantly in favor of post-intervention (RR = 0.13; 95%CI 0.03 0.57; p = 0.007). Conclusions: Despite the decreased CLABSI rate, the available evidence is low in quality. To reduce the unduly high CLABSI rates in neonatal and pediatric intensive care settings, custom-designed clinical trials should further define the clinical efficacy of MO to include it in care bundles as a new international standard.