|
Editor's
Note
Delicate balance
Use
of registries should not come at the expense of core nursing staffs
Carol Bradley, MSN, RN, California
Editor
October
8 , 2001

Recently, I
was part of a large group of concerned hospital leaders who discussed
potential solutions to the nursing shortage and what we all need
to be doing right now. In the midst of the questions, a novice CEO
asked for my opinion: "Do you think using registry is good
or bad?" Well, a little of both, I suppose. Like chocolate,
when taken in small, exquisite doses, it can be wonderful. However,
if one sits and consumes an entire box, it is not good for us at
all.
Exploring the
market forces that have changed the role that temporary nurses (registry
or traveling nurses) play in our patient care delivery system is
something we all can learn from. However, understanding the role
that registry plays in staffing patient care today requires some
careful examination.
It is important
to consider registry from two different perspectives: First, the
hospital and its nursing staff that need registry and, second, the
nurse who chooses to work registry. Each has different needs. As
you can imagine, these points of view differ greatly.
In the beginning,
the use of registry was designed to respond to patient care needs
that occurred in the peak of our season. This was generally thought
to be a wise and prudent alternative to hiring for the busy season,
only to lay off excess staff when census dropped. At most, perhaps
one registry nurse worked a given shift, and was surrounded by nurses
familiar with the hospital, patients and physicians, to serve as
resources. It made sense, didn't it?
For managers,
there was always some nagging concern that registry nurses might
not measure up or have the same clinical quality as our own staff.
Or perhaps nurses with performance problems would find a haven in
a registry where accountability was limited by the eight- to 12-hour
shifts in different hospitals.
Well, it is
definitely a different story now. Many nurses have found relative
freedom and autonomy working with temporary labor arrangements,
either short-term "a shift at a time," or longer-term
traveling contracts. While some of the comfort, stability and relationship-building
that come from going to the same place every day may be missing,
it seems the personal control over one's work life and career self-management
may compensate for it. Perhaps there are some lessons in this for
hospitals?
Although it
may benefit the nurse who chooses this newfound freedom, what has
been the overall impact on patient care?
It goes without
saying that a temporary nurse is better than none, which is the
most likely alternative. There is no more overtime to be had. We've
stretched ourselves beyond reason. However, hospitals are seeing
temporary staff making up an increasing percentage of their bedside
caregiver hours. The financial impact of this shows up on every
hospital's bottom line. It is a slippery slope, no doubt.
My growing concerns
regarding hospitals' dependence on registries are many. First is
the injustice that temporary nurses make far more money than the
hospital's core RN staff. These are the very nurses who end up serving
as a resource, guide and troubleshooter for the temporary nurse,
and supposedly represent the clinical heart and soul of a hospital.
There is something wrong with this picture.
People might
ask why an organization would pay a premium for a nurse whose commitment
to the organization does not extend beyond the shift? From a patient
care perspective, how can you risk quality and safety by placing
so much responsibility in the hands of a nurse who is most likely
unfamiliar with the setting, policies, physicians and co-workers'
abilities? Not only is this unfair to the patient, but it also is
unfair to the nurse.
Nonetheless,
temporary nurses provide a vital source of clinically expert nurses
in almost all specialties.
The bottom line
is that all our energies are best spent investing in the pipeline
for nurses, so that registry/temporary nurses can return to the
role of adjunct staff. Our investment, financial and emotional,
needs to be directed at the core-committed staff who, day after
day, are the ones we all depend on. That is where we will find patient
care that functions like a well-oiled machine, with every part knowing
its role and performing it to perfection.
What
do you think?
Email us at
editor@nurseweek.com
|