This cross-sectional study evaluates compassion fatigue and satisfaction in critical care nurses, suggesting strategies to improve psychosocial health.
Background Critical care nurses (CCNs) employed in critical care units encounter adverse working conditions, such as substantial workloads and inadequate managerial support, as well as professional challenges, including the management of patients with severe health issues, engagement with patients’ emotional and physical suffering, and ethical dilemmas. These circumstances contribute to considerable physical and psychological stress, resulting in complex emotional responses such as anxiety, fear, frustration, and burnout. Objective This study aims to evaluate the levels of compassion fatigue (CF) and compassion satisfaction (CS) among CCNs and to propose evidence-based strategies for enhancing and promoting their psychosocial health and well-being. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional design was adopted, employing the Professional Quality of Life-5 scale. A convenience sample of 168 CCNs participated, with anonymous online questionnaires serving as the primary data collection method. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical tests, with the significance level established at α < 0.05. Results The findings revealed that participants exhibited low-to-average levels of CS, alongside average-to-high levels of burnout and secondary traumatic stress. Statistically significant differences were observed in the mean scores for CS, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress across variables such as age, sex, education, and work experience. Conclusion Average-to-high levels of CF were observed among nurses, whereas CS was approximately average. Nurse managers and healthcare organizations should implement strategies to enhance CS and mitigate CF. These strategies may include mentoring, mindfulness practices, stress-reduction techniques, resilience building, coping strategies, and fostering positive workplace relationships.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D’emeh et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: