
==== Front
PLoS One
PLoS One
plos
PLOS ONE
1932-6203
Public Library of Science San Francisco, CA USA

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800
PONE-D-24-21218
Research Article
People and Places
Population Groupings
Professions
Medical Personnel
Nurses
Medicine and Health Sciences
Health Care
Health Care Providers
Nurses
Medicine and Health Sciences
Mental Health and Psychiatry
Medicine and Health Sciences
Health Care
Nursing Science
Medicine and Health Sciences
Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Health Care
Health Care Providers
Allied Health Care Professionals
Research and Analysis Methods
Research Design
Survey Research
Questionnaires
Medicine and Health Sciences
Health Care
Patients
People and Places
Population Groupings
Professions
Medical Personnel
The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursing
The importance of nurses’ mental health in patients’ satisfaction level
Huang Hui Conceptualization Formal analysis Investigation Methodology 1
Cui Jing Data curation Formal analysis Methodology Project administration Software 2
Zhang Hua Data curation Formal analysis Investigation Methodology Supervision Validation 3
Gu Yuhui Formal analysis Methodology Supervision Validation Visualization 4
Ni Haosheng Conceptualization Data curation Formal analysis Investigation Methodology Resources Validation 5
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7753-9492
Meng Ya Formal analysis Investigation Methodology Project administration Resources Validation Visualization Writing – original draft Writing – review & editing 6 *
1 Department of Infusion Room for Adults, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong, China
2 Department of Rehabilitation, Hai’an Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Hai’an, China
3 Department of Urinary Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong, China
4 Department of Endoscopic Center, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong, China
5 Department of Otolaryngology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong, China
6 Department of Outpatient Injection, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong, China
Malik Sadia Editor
University of Sargodha, PAKISTAN
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

* E-mail: mengya202312@163.com, rapagee1@gmail.com
3 9 2024
2024
19 9 e03098005 6 2024
20 8 2024
© 2024 Huang et al
2024
Huang et al
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Background

The relationship between a nurse and a patient is a key part of nursing that can impact how happy the patient is with the care they receive. It appears that the nurse’s mental health can also affect this connection. However, there is little research on this topic. So, the aim of the present study was to determine the correlation of nurse’s mental health with nurse–patient relational care and nursing care satisfaction.

Methods

A total of 532 nurses and 532 patients from 13 Level-III hospitals of Hubei province (China) completed a China Mental Health Survey, general information questionnaire, the Nursing Care Satisfaction Scale, and Relational Care Scale.

Results

Age, nurse working years, and night shift last month were correlated with mental health score (r = -0.142, r = -0.150, r = 0.164, p < 0.05). Nurse’s mental health was correlated with relational care score and nursing care satisfaction score (r = -0.177, r = -0.325, p < 0.05). Also, relational care score, patients age and gender were correlated with nursing care satisfaction score (r = 0.584 and r = 0.143, x2 = 11.636, p < 0.05). Descriptive information of nurses had a direct impact on nurses’ mental health (direct effect = 0.612, 0.419–0.713). Nurses’ mental health had a direct effect on relational care score (direct effect = 0.493, 0.298–0.428) and an indirect effect on nursing care satisfaction score (indirect effect = 0.051, 0.032–0.074). Relational care score and patient’s descriptive information had also a direct effect on nursing care satisfaction score (direct effect = 0.232, 0.057–0.172 and 0.057, 0.347–0.493).

Conclusion

This study showed that the better the mental health of nurses, the more patients feel satisfied with nursing services.

http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100018557 Science and Technology Project of Nantong City MS22022113 This study was funded by Nantong Science and Technology Project, China (Grant number: MS22022113). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Data AvailabilityAll relevant data are within the manuscript.
Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript.
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Every patient has the right to feel satisfied with the services provided by the hospital. For this reason, hospitals and many healthcare centers strive to fulfill patients’ needs through the provision of quality services such as shortening wait times and preventing unnecessary delays that can be harmful, ensuring that the quality of care is consistent, regardless of a person’s gender, race, where they live, or how much money they have, offering a complete set of health services for all stages of life, and using resources effectively to get the most benefit and not wasting them [1].

Patient satisfaction with the services provided by the hospital has various benefits. For example, it less likely that patient will sue for malpractice. It also encourages patients to be more involved in their treatment, helps healthcare centers do better financially in a competitive market, and increases the chances of improving patients’ overall health [2].

In China, there has been more focus on patient-centered care in recent years. So that, the Chinese government started a big program in 2015 to make healthcare better across the country, with goals to improve how patients feel about their care and their experiences [3]. In this system, healthcare policymakers and providers have realized the significance of patient satisfaction and have begun to view it as an indicator of care quality [4]. To achieve this goal, it is crucial to examine the diverse aspects of structural, medical, nursing, and support services. These factors contribute to the overall experience of patients.

In hospitals, emergency departments play a crucial role in shaping a patient’s first impression as they enter the healthcare system [5]. A visit to the emergency department is usually the first time a patient interacts with a hospital system. Thus, this is a special opportunity to make a positive first impression.

However, the challenges in creating a pleasant experience should not be underestimated. Many patients consider their visit to the emergency department as the worst day of their lives. This already negative view makes it harder to provide a good experience [6]. Moreover, patient satisfaction in the emergency department depends on knowing how long they’ll wait, the conditions of the section, and how well it’s organized [7].

Also, the quality of interactions with emergency staff, like nurses, also impacts patient satisfaction [8]. Some studies in emergency departments showed that patients who saw a specific healthcare provider and younger patients had more negative communication experiences than other patients [9, 10].

Nurses with good mental health show better communication skills. They listen carefully, understand patients’ concerns, and offer caring responses [11, 12]. Although many studies have been done to improve patient satisfaction, only a few have focused on communication between patients and nurses. In this study, it is assumed that the nurse’s mental health affects the relationship between nursing care satisfaction scale and relational care. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine the mental health of nurses and its relationship with nurse–patient relational care and nursing care satisfaction.

Method

Study design and participants

We carried out a cross-sectional, hospital-based, multicenter study in Hubei province, China, from November 10 to December 30, 2023. According to China’s hospital grading system, hospitals were categorized into three levels from Grade III to Grade I, with Grade III hospitals representing advanced medical and nursing capabilities. To equalize the conditions, only Grade III hospitals were selected. Since three cities lacked Level-III hospitals, a total of 13 Level-III hospitals were included. The nurses who met the inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) nurses working in an emergency department unit; (2) with at least one year of working experience; (3) willing to provide consent for participation in the study. On the other hand, the nurses who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded based on the following criteria: (1) nurses who had taken a leave for more than six months in the previous year due to different reasons; (2) nurses who were absent from work (either on leave or vacation) during the administration of the questionnaire; (3) nurses who were not directly involved in patient care, such as the head of the nursing department and head nurse. The patients who met the inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients who needed emergency department services; (2) patients who were under the care of one of the selected nurses in our study; (3) patients who expressed their willingness to participate in the study by giving consent. On the other hand, the exclusion criteria included: (1) patients with cognitive impairment or those unable to complete the survey; (2) patients who had already been discharged. This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the medical research ethics committee of affiliated hospital of Nantong university (No.20231030-42). Also, written consent was received from the participants to participate in the study.

The minimum sample size was determined by estimating the sample size according to the WHO recommendations for epidemiological studies [13]. The confidence interval (CI) was set at 95%, the standard deviation (SD) was 0.5, and the margin of error was 0.5. Additionally, a 10% contingency was added to account for non-response. Finally, the minimum sample size was 430. We invited all the nurses who had been employed in the emergency department of these 13 Level-III hospitals to participate in the study. At first, questionnaires related to nurses were distributed (November 10 to 30, 2023). After identifying the nurses who filled the questionnaires correctly, a questionnaire was given to one of the patients who received services from these nurses (December 1 to 30, 2023.)

For the purposes of modeling, values were assigned to variables including nurse and patient age (18–64 years old), nurse and patient gender (female and male), nurse working years (≥1 year), marital status of nurse and patient (married, never married, and divorced/deceased), night shift last month, weekly hours of working, nurse mental health, relational care, nursing care satisfaction, and annual income (Yuan) of patients,

Demographic information

In the present study, demographic information of nurses was including gender, age, years of working, night shift last month, marital status, and weekly hours of working were recorded. The demographic information of patients was including gender, age, annual income, and marital status.

Nursing care satisfaction scale

In this study, the scale designed by the Nursing Care Quality Control Committee of Houston Health Care System was used [14]. The Chinese version of this questionnaire has already been used in other studies [15]. This particular scale comprises of 20 items that was assigned a score ranging from 1 to 6 points, with options such as "never," "rarely," "sometimes," "often," "most of the time," and "always." The total score on the scale amounted to 120, with higher scores indicating greater patient satisfaction with the nurses’ care. The reliability of this scale in the study was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which yielded a value of 0.92, indicating good reliability.

Relational care scale

The scale developed by Ray and Turkel (2001), was used to measure nurse-patient relationship [16]. The patient version comprises 15 items categorized into three dimensions: work trust, ethics, and care. Each item is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". The total score possible is 75 points, with a higher score indicating a stronger nurse-patient relationship. The Chinese version of this questionnaire has already been used in other studies [15]. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the overall scale was 0.83.

Mental health

The GHQ-12 assesses the mental health status of nurses through 12 self-assessment items. Each item presents four options (A, B, C, and D), and utilizes a bimodal scoring method (0-0-1-1). The scoring method was as follows selecting A or B results in a score of 0, while choosing C or D leads to a score of 1. A cumulative score of ≥ 4 was considered a positive mental health screening rate, indicating conditions such as anxiety, depression, or insomnia [17]. A higher score indicates a more severe mental health condition. The Chinese versions of GHQ-12 for professional groups, healthcare workers, and the general population demonstrated high internal consistency [18, 19] featured good reliability and validity. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this scale was 0.89.

Statistical analysis

Demographic data, mental health, and nursing care satisfaction scale and relational care scale were summarized using descriptive statistics and analyzed through the correlation matrix, chi-square (χ2) test, and nonparametric tests in SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Proportions were utilized for qualitative and ordinal data, while means and standard deviations (SD) were used for quantitative data. The structural equation modeling was carried out with AMOS 26.0 version. The fitness of the model was assessed using fitness indices such as goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the normal fit index (NFI), comparative fit index (CFI), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and Tacker-Lewis index (TLI). The GFI and the AGFI should be > 0.95 and > 0.90 [20]. CFI should be > 0.96 [21] or > 0.90 [20]. NFI should be > 0.90 [20] or > 0.95 [22]. RMSEA should be < 0.05 [23].

Results

In total, 582 questionnaires were filled by nurses. However, 532 questionnaires were approved and incompletely filled questionnaires were not included in the statistical analysis. According to the selection of one patient from each nurse who provided services to her, a total of 532 patients’ questionnaires were included in the statistical analysis. The characteristics of the participants are shown in detail in Table 1. 69% of nurses and 53% of patients were female. 75% of nurses and 71% of patients were married. The mean of working years, night shift per last month, and weekly hours of nurses were 7.00 ± 3.815 years, 4.822 ± 4.542 night, and 41.185 ± 4.314 hours, respectively. Also, the average score of nurses’ mental health was 2.52 ± 1.529 and the positive rate of mental health status was 26.19%.

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.t001 Table 1 The characteristics of the participants.

	Nurse	Patient	
Age (year)	26.69 ± 4.34 years	41.921 ± 17.49	
Gender (%)	Female	69%	53%	
Male	31%	47%	
Marital status (%)	married	75%	71%	
never married	16%	11%	
divorced/deceased	9%	18%	
Working years (year)	7.00 ± 3.815		
Weekly hours of working (hour)	41.185 ± 4.314		
Night shift last month (day)	4.822 ± 4.542		
Mental health	2.52 ± 1.529		
Annual income (Yuan)		333,765 ± 311,476.5	
Satisfaction with nursing care		53.9 ± 34.793	
Relational care		38.902 ± 18.825	

The mean annual income of patients, patients’ satisfaction with nursing care and relational care were 333,765 ± 311,476.5 Yuan, 53.9 ± 34.793 and 38.902 ± 18.825, respectively. No significant difference was observed between female and male nurses and female and male patients in the research variables (p > 0.05).

Pearson correlation and χ2 tests were used to explore the correlation between variables (Tables 2 and 3). Nurse age was correlated with nurse working years (r = 0.841, p < 0.05), night shift last month (r = -0.226, p < 0.05) and mental health score (r = -0.142, p < 0.05). Nurse working years was correlated with mental health score (r = -0.150, p < 0.05). Night shift last month was correlated with weekly hours of working (r = 0.164, p < 0.05) and mental health (r = -0.275, p < 0.05). Nurse mental health was correlated with relational care score (r = -0.325, p < 0.05) and nursing care satisfaction score (r = -0.177, p < 0.05). Also, relational care score, patients age and gender were correlated with nursing care satisfaction score (r = 0.584 and r = 0.143, x2 = 11.636, p < 0.05).

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.t002 Table 2 Correlation between study variables.

	1	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	12	13	
1	1	0.841*	0.092	-0.226*	-0.112	-0.142*	0.091	0.012				
3	0.841*	1	0.101	-0.041	-0.026	-0.150*	0.059	0.078				
4	0.092	0.101	1	-0.081	-0.111	0.021	0.039	0.103				
5	-0.226*	-0.041	-0.081	1	0.164*	0.275*	-0.081	-0.088				
6	-0.112	-0.026	-0.111	0.164*	1	0.126	-0.021	-0.049				
7	-0.142*	-0.150*	0.021	0.275*	0.126	1	-0.325*	-0.177*				
8	0.091	0.059	0.039	-0.081	-0.021	-0.325*	1	0.584*	0.050	0.147	0.082	
9	0.012	0.078	0.103	-0.088	-0.049	-0.177*	0.584*	1	0.143*	0.070	0.042	
10							0.050	0.143*	1	0.037	0.109	
12							0.147	0.070	0.037	1	0.078	
13							0.082	0.042	0.109	0.078	1	
*P<0.05; 1 = nurse age; 3 = nurse working years; 4 = marital status of nurse; 5 = night shift last month; 6 = weekly hours of working; 7 = mental health score; 8 = relational Care score; 9 = nursing care satisfaction score; 10 = patient age; 12 = annual income (Yuan) of patients; 13 = marital status of patient

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.t003 Table 3 Chi-square test and nonparametric test results for study variables (χ2 / Z value).

	1	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	12	13	
2	0.073	8.168	2.041	-0.049	-0.059	2.261	-0.223	-1.731				
11							-0.615	11.636*	-0.246	-1.019	-0.132	
*P<0.05; 1 = nurse age; 2 = nurse gender; 3 = nurse working years; 4 = marital status of nurse; 5 = night shift last month; 6 = weekly hours of working; 7 = mental health score; 8 = relational Care score; 9 = nursing care satisfaction score; 10 = patient age; 11 = patient gender; 12 = annual income (Yuan) of patients; 13 = marital status of patient

Descriptive information of nurses and patients, mental health, relational care score and nursing care satisfaction score were entered into the model. The final structural equation model fitted well with the study data (χ2 = 439.188, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.959, AGFI = 0.939, RMSEA = 0.049) (Fig 1). All effects were significant (p < 0.001).

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.g001 Fig 1 Modified model of nurse’s mental health and relational care score and nursing care satisfaction data in patients.

*The goodness-of-fit indices were: CFI = 0.962, NFI = 0.951, TLI = 0.949, GFI = 0.959, AGFI = 0.939, RMSEA = 0.049. *P < 0.05; X1 = nurse age; X2 = nurse gender; X3 = nurse working years; X4 = marital status of nurse; X5 = night shift last month; X6 = weekly hours of working; DIN = descriptive information of nurses; X7 = mental health score; X8 = relational Care score; X9 = nursing care satisfaction score; DIP = descriptive information of patients; X10 = patient age; X11 = patient gender; X12 = annual income (Yuan) of patients; X13 = marital status of patient.

Table 4 shows the standardized direct, indirect, and total effects, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for each construct. Four direct, one indirect, and five total effects were significant. Descriptive information of nurses had a direct impact on nurses’ mental health (direct effect = 0.612, 0.419–0.713). Nurses’ mental health had a direct effect on relational Care score (direct effect = 0.493, 0.298–0.428) and an indirect effect on nursing care satisfaction score (indirect effect = 0.051, 0.032–0.074). Relational Care score and patient’s descriptive information had also a direct effect on nursing care satisfaction score (direct effect = 0.232, 0.057–0.172 and 0.057, 0.347–0.493).

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.t004 Table 4 Standardized direct, indirect, and total effects of variables in the final model (95% CI).

Exogenous variable	Endogenous variable	Direct effect	Indirect effect	Total effect	
Nurses descriptive information	Mental health	0.612 (0.419–0.713)*		0.612 (0.419–0.713)*	
	Relational Care score		0.114 (0.129–0.201)	0.114 (0.129–0.201)	
	Nursing care satisfaction score		0.056 (0.023–0.051)	0.056 (0.023–0.051)	
Mental health	Relational Care score	0.493 (0.298–0.428)*		0.493 (0.298–0.428)*	
	Nursing care satisfaction score		0.051 (0.032–0.074)*	0.051 (0.032–0.074)*	
Relational Care score	Nursing care satisfaction score	0.232 (0.057–0.172)*		0.232 (0.057–0.172)*	
Patients descriptive information	Nursing care satisfaction score	0.057 (0.347–0.493)*		0.057 (0.347–0.493)*	

Discussion

Patient satisfaction and their expectations of care are important indicators of high-quality nursing care in hospitals and healthcare facilities. Because of this, these centers are looking for ways to improve patient satisfaction by providing good services. It is important to understand what factors affect how satisfied patients are.

The current study found that male patients were more satisfied with nursing care than female patients. This result is consistent with the findings of Rafii et al (2009) and Guo et al. (2023), which also showed that male patients were more satisfied with the nursing care they received [15, 24]. Men usually have lower expectations and are less sensitive than women, and they often receive more information from nurses, which might make them more satisfied with the nursing care [15, 25].

Another finding from this study is that age had a positive correlation with nursing care satisfaction; In addition, age had a direct effect on nursing care satisfaction. This means that patients who are older were more satisfied than younger patients. These results are consistent with other studies [15, 26, 27].

It appears that older patients have lower expectations for nursing services and fewer needs compared to younger patients, which makes them more likely to be satisfied. Additionally, older patients may be more socially aware, more forgiving, and more appreciative and empathetic towards their caregivers [27].

Nurses often interact the most with patients. The correlation analysis of this study showed that when nurses have good relationships with patients, the patients are more satisfied with the care they receive. Also, analysis indicated that the nurse-patient relational care score directly affects nursing care satisfaction, which is consistent with other studies results [15, 28]. Good communication between nurses and patients is important for the patients and their families to feel satisfied with the care. If communication is poor, it can cause a lack of trust and harm the relationship between the patient and the nurse [29, 30]. Some studies suggest that better training can help nurses improve their communication skills, which can lead to safer care, better health results, patients following their treatment plans, and overall satisfaction with the care they receive. Moreover, it helps healthcare workers feel more valued and effective [31, 32].

The role of the nurse in the relationship between nurse-patient relational care score with nursing care satisfaction has been less investigated. One of the aspects that can be paid attention to is the role of the nurse’s mental health in the relationship between nurse-patient relational care score with nursing care satisfaction.

However, this issue has not been given much attention in the study so far. In our study, we found that the mental health of nurses can indirectly affect patient satisfaction through influencing the nurse-patient relational care. Good mental health in nurses can increase their self-confidence and ability to do their job well by talking with patients. This helps them share information effectively and handle difficult situations without feeling stressed. Showing respect and understanding the needs of patients with dual diagnosis is very important in providing good care. Research has shown that understanding the perspectives of these individuals can be very beneficial [33].

Considering the importance of the role of mental health of nurses in the relationship between nurse-patient relational care score with nursing care satisfaction, it’s important to focus on what affects nurses’ mental health. In this study, it was found that older nurses who have been working longer tend to have better mental health, meaning they experience less stress, anxiety, and depression. This is likely because they have more experience and maturity. In fact, age and years of work were found to be factors that reduce the chances of poor mental health. Other studies have also shown that younger nurses with less experience are more likely to feel stressed [34, 35].

In this research, it was found that the more night shifts nurses worked each month, the worse their mental health tended to be. A study conducted by Torquati et al., (2019) showed that working shifts increased the chances of having mental health problems like depression and anxiety [36]. Normally, people sleep at night and are awake during the day. However, to keep the healthcare system running well, many healthcare workers, like nurses, have to work night shifts either regularly or permanently [37].

The night nurses give constant care and watch over patients, and they also give out medicine. However, working night shifts regularly can lead to poor mental health, which can cause them to feel different emotions, have trouble thinking, not want to do things, do their job worse, be more likely to get hurt, and have changes in their body [38]. Some studies showed that nurses who moved from night shifts to day shifts experienced a significant reduction in symptoms of depression and anxiety over a 2-year period [39, 40].

It is important to acknowledge some limitations of this study. Firstly, the use of a cross-sectional design prevents the identification of a causal relationship between variables. Secondly, the number of questions and the time required to fill them can make the participants tired and impatient.

Conclusion

Overall, this study found that the mental health of nurses is one of the indirect factors affecting patients’ satisfaction. So, focusing on nurses’ mental well-being and helping them feel better could be a way to make patients more satisfied with their nursing care.

We thank all the nurses and patients who participated in this study.

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.r001
Decision Letter 0
Malik Sadia Academic Editor
© 2024 Sadia Malik
2024
Sadia Malik
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Submission Version0
19 Jul 2024

PONE-D-24-21218The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Meng,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 02 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sadia Malik, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "This study was funded by Nantong Science and Technology Project, China (Grant number: MS22022113)."

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that " The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request."

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: ID: PONE-D-24-21218

Title: The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursing

Thank you for providing a chance to review this manuscript.

Detailed information:

Keywords："mental health" should read "Mental health".

Abstract

Line 28 - 38, page 2: Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, with spaces before and after "=" and "<".

Overall: The abstract requires a brief overview of the background, purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of the article. What's your conclusion?

Introduction

Line 61 - 63, page 4: “hospitals and many healthcare centers strive to fulfill patients' needs through the provision of quality services” Is it possible to give some relevant examples so that readers can understand.

Line 76 - 77, page 4: “Emergency departments have a distinct advantage in influencing a patient's initial perception as they navigate through the healthcare system” How is the emergency department different from other departments and can it be explained?

Method

Study design and participants

Line 98 - 103, page 5: Are all tertiary hospitals in the area included?

Line 99, page 5: “November 10 to December 30, 2023.” When were the surveys of nurses and patients respectively conducted? Please be specific.

Line 102, page 5: “only Grade III hospitals were selected” Why choose more than just secondary hospitals? Why choose only tertiary hospitals? What are the advantages of tertiary hospitals over other levels of hospitals for this study?

Line 104, page 5: Why were emergency department nurses used as survey respondents? And not other unit nurses? How is the emergency department different from other departments?

Line 104 - 108, page 5: “with at least one year of working experienc”“nurses who had taken a leave for more than six months in the previous year due to different reasons” Why the one-year and six-month timeframes? Is there a basis for this? If so, please explain.

Line 129 - 130, page 7 - 8: 1) Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text. 2) Please use a 3-wire meter. 3) Personally, I don't think there is a great need to set up a table to account for this information, and it's fine to account for it directly in the body of the text.

Demographic information

Line 131 - 135, page 8: Is a demographic table available? If not, it is recommended that a demographic table be drawn up so that the demographic characteristics of nurses and patients are displayed more clearly.

Nursing care satisfaction scale

Line 138 - 139, page 8: The result of the application? Good or bad? Please elaborate.

Line 143, page 8: “Cronbach's α coefficient” Note that the full name is alpha.

Statistical analysis

Line 164 - 169, page 9: 1) chi-square test requires italics. Please correct.

Line 170 - 172, page 10: What is the recommended range to which these values apply? What is the literature on which they are based? Please provide details.

Results

Line 174, page 10: Are 532 nurses and 532 patients the final sample size? Were there any missing samples during the survey? How were the missing samples handled?

Overall: 1) Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text. 2) My suggestion is to divide it into subheadings according to the content of the research.

There are some problems in this article: 1) punctuation conforms to the use of incorrect; 2) much of the content is not detailed enough; 3) there are some logical errors.

Thank you and my best,

Your reviewer

Reviewer #2: This article is a good and high quality work. Also, Its topic is interesting for researchers. The methodology and method is sound. Study recommendations are useful. Hence in my opinion, this manuscript is eligible for publication.

My decision: Accept

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr. Esmail Khodadadi

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.r002
Author response to Decision Letter 0
Submission Version1
31 Jul 2024

I thank you, dear reviewers. Your valuable comments can make me learn more and more. I tried my best to do the revisions according to your comments.

Also, we tried to edit the entire text.

Reviewer comment: Keywords："mental health" should read "Mental health".

we corrected (line 41).

Reviewer comment: Line 28 - 38, page 2: Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, with spaces before and after "=" and "<".

According to one of the articles that was recently published in PLOS ONE journal (Waddington EE, Allison DJ, Calabrese EM, Pekos C, Lee A, et al. (2024) Orienteering combines vigorous-intensity exercise with navigation to improve human cognition and increase brain-derived neurotrophic factor. PLOS ONE 19(5): e0303785. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303785), I edited the punctuation in the entire text.

Reviewer comment: Overall: The abstract requires a brief overview of the background, purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of the article. What's your conclusion?

we added conclusion and edited.

Reviewer comment: Line 61 - 63, page 4: “hospitals and many healthcare centers strive to fulfill patients' needs through the provision of quality services” Is it possible to give some relevant examples so that readers can understand.

We added (lines 46-50).

Reviewer comment: Line 76 - 77, page 4: “Emergency departments have a distinct advantage in influencing a patient's initial perception as they navigate through the healthcare system” How is the emergency department different from other departments and can it be explained?

A visit to the emergency department is usually the first time a patient interacts with a hospital system. Thus, this is a special opportunity to make a positive first impression.

We added these sentences (lines 65-67).

Reviewer comment: Line 98 - 103, page 5: Are all tertiary hospitals in the area included?

Yes, all Level-III hospitals were included in the study. All the cities of Hubei province except for three cities had this model of hospitals.

Reviewer comment: Line 99, page 5: “November 10 to December 30, 2023.” When were the surveys of nurses and patients respectively conducted? Please be specific.

We added (lines 112 to 115).

Reviewer comment: Line 102, page 5: “only Grade III hospitals were selected” Why choose more than just secondary hospitals? Why choose only tertiary hospitals? What are the advantages of tertiary hospitals over other levels of hospitals for this study?

We had to choose a hospital model to match the situation. Therefore, this question arose in each of the hospitals we chose. Therefore, choosing these types of hospitals in our research does not have a special advantage. In the future, research can be done according to the quality level of hospitals and comparison of services.

Reviewer comment: Line 104, page 5: Why were emergency department nurses used as survey respondents? And not other unit nurses? How is the emergency department different from other departments?

A visit to the emergency department is usually the first time a patient interacts with a hospital system. Thus, this is a special opportunity to make a positive first impression. Therefore, the nurses who work in these departments are among the first medical staff of the hospital who deal with the patient.

We added these sentences (lines 65-67).

Reviewer comment: Line 104 - 108, page 5: “with at least one year of working experienc”“nurses who had taken a leave for more than six months in the previous year due to different reasons” Why the one-year and six-month timeframes? Is there a basis for this? If so, please explain.

This time period was chosen according to a pattern taken from other articles.

Reviewer comment: Line 129 - 130, page 7 - 8: 1) Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text. 2) Please use a 3-wire meter. 3) Personally, I don't think there is a great need to set up a table to account for this information, and it's fine to account for it directly in the body of the text.

Yes, according to your comment, I removed the table and entered the content in the text (lines 116-118).

Line 131 - 135, page 8: Is a demographic table available? If not, it is recommended that a demographic table be drawn up so that the demographic characteristics of nurses and patients are displayed more clearly:

I added Table 1.

Line 138 - 139, page 8: The result of the application? Good or bad? Please elaborate.

This questionnaire is not classified. In addition, we were looking for quantitative data to evaluate its relationship with mental health.

Line 143, page 8: “Cronbach's α coefficient” Note that the full name is alpha.:

I corrected (lines 133, 141, 152).

Line 164 - 169, page 9: 1) chi-square test requires italics. Please correct.

I corrected.

Line 170 - 172, page 10: What is the recommended range to which these values apply? What is the literature on which they are based? Please provide details.

I added lines 162 to 164.

Line 174, page 10: Are 532 nurses and 532 patients the final sample size? Were there any missing samples during the survey? How were the missing samples handled?

I added lines 166 to 170.

Pay attention to the norms of punctuation, please verify that punctuation is used correctly throughout the text.

We edited it.

Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.r003
Decision Letter 1
Malik Sadia Academic Editor
© 2024 Sadia Malik
2024
Sadia Malik
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Submission Version1
20 Aug 2024

The role of mental health in the relationship between nursing care satisfaction with nurse-patient relational care in Chinese emergency department nursing

PONE-D-24-21218R1

Dear Dr. Meng,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Sadia Malik, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

10.1371/journal.pone.0309800.r004
Acceptance letter
Malik Sadia Academic Editor
© 2024 Sadia Malik
2024
Sadia Malik
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
22 Aug 2024

PONE-D-24-21218R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Meng,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sadia Malik

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE
==== Refs
References

1 Fatima T. , Malik S.A. , and Shabbir A. , Hospital healthcare service quality, patient satisfaction and loyalty: An investigation in context of private healthcare systems. International journal of quality & Reliability Management, 2018. 35 (6 ): p. 1195–1214.
2 Ferreira D.C. , et al . Patient satisfaction with healthcare services and the techniques used for its assessment: a systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis. in Healthcare. 2023. MDPI.
3 Liang H. , Xue Y. , and Zhang Z.-r , Patient satisfaction in China: a national survey of inpatients and outpatients. BMJ open, 2021. 11 (9 ): p. e049570. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049570 34493518
4 Liang H. , Reiss M.J. , and Isaacs T. , Factors affecting physicians’ attitudes towards patient-centred care: a cross-sectional survey in Beijing. BMJ open, 2023. 13 (4 ): p. e073224. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073224 37015797
5 Uscher-Pines L. , et al ., Emergency department visits for nonurgent conditions: systematic literature review. The American journal of managed care, 2013. 19 (1 ): p. 47–59. 23379744
6 Mutlu S. , Çetinkaya A. , and Yılmaz E. , Emergency Service Perceptions and Experiences of Patients:“Not A Great Place, But Not Disturbing”. Journal of Patient Experience, 2021. 8 : p. 23743735211034298. doi: 10.1177/23743735211034298 34368435
7 Natesan P. , et al ., Comparing patients and families perceptions of satisfaction and predictors of overall satisfaction in the emergency department. PLoS One, 2019. 14 (8 ): p. e0221087. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221087 31408490
8 Abidova A. , da Silva P.A. , and Moreira S. , Predictors of patient satisfaction and the perceived quality of healthcare in an emergency department in Portugal. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2020. 21 (2 ): p. 391. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2019.9.44667 31999247
9 Hermann R.M. , Long E. , and Trotta R.L. , Improving patients’ experiences communicating with nurses and providers in the emergency department. Journal of emergency nursing, 2019. 45 (5 ): p. 523–530. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2018.12.001 30655007
10 Chan E.A. , et al ., Patients’ perceptions of their experiences with nurse-patient communication in oncology settings: A focused ethnographic study. PloS one, 2018. 13 (6 ): p. e0199183. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199183 29912967
11 Babaii A. , Mohammadi E. , and Sadooghiasl A. , The meaning of the empathetic nurse–patient communication: A qualitative study. Journal of patient experience, 2021. 8 : p. 23743735211056432. doi: 10.1177/23743735211056432 34869836
12 Picco L. , et al ., Positive mental health among health professionals working at a psychiatric hospital. PloS one, 2017. 12 (6 ): p. e0178359. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178359 28591203
13 Hajian-Tilaki K. , Sample size estimation in epidemiologic studies. Caspian journal of internal medicine, 2011. 2 (4 ): p. 289. 24551434
14 Sherwood G. , Methodist health care system nurse caring instrument. Assessing and Measuring Caring in Nursing and Health Sciences: Watson’s Caring Science Guide, 2019.
15 Guo S. , et al ., Patient satisfaction with nurses’ care is positively related to the nurse–patient relationship in Chinese hospitals: A multicentre study. Frontiers in Public Health, 2023. 10 : p. 1109313. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1109313 36761322
16 Ray M. and Turkel C. , Relational caring questionnaires. Assessing and measuring caring in nursing and health sciences (3rd ed., pp. 213–234). Springer Publishing, 2019.
17 Zhong X. , et al ., Reliability and validity of general health Questionnaire-12 in Chinese dental healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. 12 : p. 792838. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.792838 35115967
18 Liang Y. , Wang L. , and Yin X. , The factor structure of the 12-item general health questionnaire (GHQ-12) in young Chinese civil servants. Health and quality of life outcomes, 2016. 14 (1 ): p. 1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0539-y 26744040
19 Kashyap G.C. and Singh S.K. , Reliability and validity of general health questionnaire (GHQ-12) for male tannery workers: a study carried out in Kanpur, India. BMC psychiatry, 2017. 17 : p. 1–7.28049496
20 Byrne B.M. , Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. 1994: Sage.
21 Hu L.t . and Bentler P.M , Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 1999. 6 (1 ): p. 1–55.
22 Schumacker R.E. and Lomax R.G. , A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. 2004: psychology press.
23 Wei Z.R. , Application of structural equation model and AMOS software. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2014. 687 : p. 1577–1579.
24 Rafii F. , Hajinezhad M.E. , and Haghani H. , Nurse caring in Iran and its relationship with patient satisfaction. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, The, 2008. 26 (2 ): p. 75–84.
25 Johansson P. , Oleni M. , and Fridlund B. , Patient satisfaction with nursing care in the context of health care: a literature study. Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 2002. 16 (4 ): p. 337–344. doi: 10.1046/j.1471-6712.2002.00094.x 12445102
26 Milutinović D. , et al ., The patient satisfaction with nursing care quality: the psychometric study of the Serbian version of PSNCQ questionnaire. Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 2012. 26 (3 ): p. 598–606. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.00969.x 22272735
27 Kasa A.S. and Gedamu H. , Predictors of adult patient satisfaction with nursing care in public hospitals of Amhara region, Northwest Ethiopia. BMC health services research, 2019. 19 : p. 1–9.30606168
28 Alhussin E.M. , et al ., Patients’ satisfaction with the quality of nursing care: A cross-section study. International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences, 2024: p. 100690.
29 Alharbi H.F. , et al ., Patients’ satisfaction with nursing care quality and associated factors: A cross‐section study. Nursing open, 2023. 10 (5 ): p. 3253–3262. doi: 10.1002/nop2.1577 36585398
30 Woo B.F.Y. , Lee J.X.Y. , and Tam W.W.S. , The impact of the advanced practice nursing role on quality of care, clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and cost in the emergency and critical care settings: a systematic review. Human resources for health, 2017. 15 : p. 1–22.28056998
31 Aiken L.H. , et al ., Patient satisfaction with hospital care and nurses in England: an observational study. BMJ open, 2021. 8 (1 ): p. e019189.
32 McGilton K. , et al ., Communication enhancement: nurse and patient satisfaction outcomes in a complex continuing care facility. Journal of advanced nursing, 2006. 54 (1 ): p. 35–44. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03787.x 16553689
33 Ould Brahim L. , Hanganu C. , and Gros C.P. , Understanding helpful nursing care from the perspective of mental health inpatients with a dual diagnosis: a qualitative descriptive study. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 2020. 26 (3 ): p. 250–261. doi: 10.1177/1078390319878773 31587601
34 Kim S.C. , et al ., Predictors of poor mental health among nurses during COVID‐19 pandemic. Nursing Open, 2021. 8 (2 ): p. 900–907. doi: 10.1002/nop2.697 33570266
35 Cheung T. and Yip P.S. , Depression, anxiety and symptoms of stress among Hong Kong nurses: a cross-sectional study. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2015. 12 (9 ): p. 11072–11100. doi: 10.3390/ijerph120911072 26371020
36 Torquati L. , et al ., Shift work and poor mental health: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. American journal of public health, 2019. 109 (11 ): p. e13–e20. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305278 31536404
37 Okechukwu C.E. , et al ., Biological and practical considerations regarding circadian rhythm and mental health relationships among nurses working night shifts: a narrative review and recommendations. Revista di Psichiatria, 2022. 57 (2 ): p. 1–13. doi: 10.1708/3790.37738 35426425
38 Hughes R. , Patient safety and quality: An evidence-based handbook for nurses. 2008.
39 Thun E. , et al ., Night work and symptoms of anxiety and depression among nurses: A longitudinal study. Work & Stress, 2014. 28 (4 ): p. 376–386.
40 Berthelsen M. , et al ., Effects of psychological and social factors in shiftwork on symptoms of anxiety and depression in nurses: a 1-year follow-up. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2015. 57 (10 ): p. 1127–1137. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000532 26461869
