1. 1 1 INDICATORS EVALUATION OF THE NURSING STAFF MANAGEMENT THAT CAN DISTURB THE SURGICAL DEPARTMENT Management PASAOGLU Silva PASAOGLU Silva Master in Public Health Science Master in Public Health Science Department: care institution management Department: care institution management Option: General and geriatrics Option: General and geriatrics

2. 2 2 I. INTRODUCTION This is essential : ● to carry on in cares; ● the polyvalency of the « OR Nurse » (operating room nurse) The surgical department : ● is a financial source ; ● permits the working of Surgical departments and one-day hospitals ;

3. 3 3 II. THE AIMS OF THIS STUDY 1) HR analysis ( Human ressources) Nursing management ; Age pyramid ; Overtime ; Temporary workers resort ; Staff rotation; Absenteeism 2) To demonstrate the interest to set up a float team

4. 4 4 ==► To find a solution ● to permit the continuity and the quality of cares ; ● to permit the continuity and the quality of cares ; ● to reduce the costs ; ● to reduce the costs ; ● to obtain the polyvalency and the flexibility ; ● to obtain the polyvalency and the flexibility ; ● to ensure the immediate replacement ; ● to ensure the immediate replacement ; ● to make fair the work distribution ; ● to make fair the work distribution ; ● to reduce overtime. ● to reduce overtime.

5. 5 5 III. EQUIPMENTS AND METHODES This study is based on : 6 indicators 6 indicators nursing staff nursing staff 2 SU(surgical units) in 2 different hospital 2 SU(surgical units) in 2 different hospital ( 12 and 26 operating rooms) two years (2005-2006) two years (2005-2006)

6. 6 6 The Indicators Methodology : 1) The nursing teams in FTE (full time equivalent) : ● distinction between foreseen and real FTE ; 2) The age pyramid : 2) The age pyramid : ● calculated according to the birth year of the staff ● no distribution according to the sex ● observed by groups of five years

7. 7 7 3) Overtime : Expressed : Expressed : ● in days ( ÷ by 7,6 hours) ● in FTE ( 226 days for the SU one and 217 days for the SU two ) 4) The temporary workers resort : 5) The rotation rate :

8. 8 8 6) The absenteeism : Study by age group (WHO 2004) Study by age group (WHO 2004) Calculated on absence days according to the worker contract : Calculated on absence days according to the worker contract : Are not allowed : Are not allowed : the days of the contract break the days of the contract break the days of a career interruption and parental leave. the days of a career interruption and parental leave.

9. 9 9 IV. RESULTS 1) The nursing management in FTE Value SU 1 (2005) (2006) SU 2 (2005) (2006) FTE foreseen / month 28,64 109,05 112,3 Real FTE in average /month ± SD (standard deviation) ± 0,77 28,30 ± 0,77 ± 0,75 30,15 ± 0,75 ± 2,49 100,52 ± 2,49 ± 3,54 108,30 ± 3,54 Foreseen FTE / month / operating room 2,38 4,194,31 Real FTE / month / operating room 2,352,513,864,16 P value 0,16< 0,05 Global staff of the year 40 132144

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12 2) The age pyramid

13. 13 3) Overtime Overtime SU 1 (2005) (2006) SU 2 (2005) (2006) Total (year) on day 685,17415,43872,421108,37 FTE (year) on day 226 217 Total (year) in FTE 3,031,844,025,11 Extra days / FTE 24,213,778,6810,23 Extra days / nurse N = staff number 17,13 (N = 40) 10,38 (N = 40) 6,61 (N = 132) 7,70 (N = 144)

14. 14 SU 1, a ↑ FTE has caused a decrease of hours SU 1, a ↑ FTE has caused a decrease of hours SU 2, a ↑ FTE has caused an increase of hours SU 2, a ↑ FTE has caused an increase of hours ? A nursing staff deficit A nursing staff deficit An increase of the activity An increase of the activity A bad work organization A bad work organization

15. 15 4) The temporary workers resort (SU 1): Variable (in day) JanFevMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugSeptOct.Nov.DecTotal The temporary workers resort (2005) 00009800000017 The temporary workers resort (2006) 0004001400009

16. 16 5) The rotation rate : SU 1 (2005) SU 1 (2006) SU 2 (2005) SU 2 (2006) The rotation rate 10%2.5%4.8%2.9 %

17. 17 6) The absenteeism

18. 18 The annual absenteeism rate of the two institutions ValueSU 1 (2005) SU 1 (2006) SU 2 (2005) SU 2 (2006) Absenteeism (%) 5,444,444,725,43

19. 19 The factor of Bradford : is an indicator which allows the employer to identify workers whose non – attendance cause a problem because of their frequency and repetitiveness.

20. 20 The Bradford Factor is calculated as such: frequency ² x number of illness days (on annual basis). From SD WORX, a specialized company in human resources

21. 21 For example: Philippe is a full-time employee. In 2004, he was absent 5 times. He sums up 8 days of illness. Nathalie also works full time. She was absent only once. She totalizes 18 days of illness. → Philippe obtains a score of 5 x 5 x 8 = 200 → Nathalie obtains a score of 1 x 1 x 18 = 18 From SD WORX, a specialized company in human resources

22. 22 The factor of Bradford : Factor of Bradford (in %) SU 2 (2005) SU 2 (2006) global 271,9236,14 < 140 8579,2 > 140 1520.8

23. 23 V. CONCLUSIONS We observe a variability : ● of the TFE number and staff ● of the different indicators :  from a year to the other  from a year to the other  from an institution to the other  from an institution to the other

24. 24 ==> POLYVALENCY AND FLEXIBILITY : CREATION OF A FLOAT TEAM !

25. 25 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION