Stop the (Deskilling) Merry-Go-Round, I Want to Get OFF!

de-skill [dee-skil] verb (used with object) to remove any need of skill, judgment, or initiative in: jobs being deskilled by automation. Health care experiments in deskilling the work force seem to crop up about once a decade. How does it happen and what can we do? Nurses Announcements Archive Article

Stop the (Deskilling) Merry-Go-Round, I Want to Get OFF!

Alternative title (courtesy of Brian Booth): How much is that cheap thing you bought going to cost you in the long run?

Once upon a time, the Powers-That-Be, residing in the ivory towers of academe, decided that nurses should be considered professional providers of health care. The main flaw in the situation at the time was the definition of professional, which implied university preparation with perhaps some advanced education on top... and too many of the "professionals" in the nursing field had been educated through hospitals or community colleges so were therefore not entitled to call themselves professionals. These lesser souls had been trained in the necessary skills to provide excellent care to their patients, but lacked the liberal arts education deemed essential to professionalism. And so the baby was thrown out with the bath water, a university education was declared the minimum for entry to practice as a professional nurse and much money changed hands.

The further from its roots nursing moved, the less it seemed the skills of patient care mattered. After all, professionals command professional remuneration, and no one wants to pay any more than they have to for things like washing bottoms. Besides, professional nurses have the documentation that indicates they have the education to supervise and manage bottom-washing.

So again the Powers-That-Be got together, determined to uncover methods of economy for the care they were required to provide. Their solution was to put the professionals in charge and hire others willing to wash bottoms for a smaller wage. They were shocked to discover, right about the time they were expecting to reap the benefits of this new regime, their costs actually started rising!

Unable to comprehend this unexpected outcome, they began to examine what was really happening. Imagine their surprise when they discovered that their patients were staying in hospital longer, for reasons such as serious ulcerations of the areas the bottom-washers were responsible for, new illnesses they had not arrived with, becoming ill with another patients' sickness and falling out of bed. After much deliberation it was determined that having untrained personnel responsible for multiple fragments of the care provided to patients, without any connecting-of-the-dots, was the cause. And so professional nurses were added back into the workplace. Only they were no longer being taught to wash bottoms and needed a lengthy orientation to patient care when they arrived.

It's too bad this isn't a fairy tale. Not in the UK, not in Canada, not in the US... it's real life. Today's nurses are not really being taught to care for patients during their 4 years of university. All of that comes later, once they've been hired into a direct care position where they find they lack the psychometric skills to perform the work. Hence the ever-expanding orientation period.

What used to require a few weeks at most, for the new nurse to become familiar with the ward layout, routines, paperwork and patient population has morphed into an unwieldy period of months. New hires require education not only related to specific patient populations but also a variety of basic nursing skills in order to function independently. The cost of this extended orientation period is exorbitant but must be borne in order to staff our health care facilities.

At the same time, the cost of providing direct care has continued to increase, causing health care systems to look for ways to economise. Because health care is a human-resources dependent endeavour, salaries comprise the lion's share of the budget. So how can a system save money on salaries? Introduce lesser-trained and often unregulated task-oriented personnel who are not responsible for critical decision-making, only to accomplishing their list of tasks... who will be paid considerably less than the nurses formerly providing the care.

Once the thin edge of the wedge has been inserted, the scope of duties these new personnel are performing can be stealthily and deliberately expanded until the nurse becomes little more than a supervisor, but still retains the responsibility and accountability of the profession toward all patients receiving care. Simple, effective implementation of this model of care brings the bottom line down. At least initially.

What leads to the failure of this model is the increase in morbidity and mortality seen once the whole train gets rolling at full speed. Readmissions, health-care related infections, pressure-related injuries, increased lengths of stay, unexpected deaths and other deleterious effects begin to compound on each other and the bottom line eventually suffers. Then the highly-paid and only mildly accountable upper management team rejigs the model, hiring more nurses and utilizing fewer auxiliary staff until the merry-go-round has gone full circle. All of this takes about a decade to complete its orbit, and a new one begins. Over the last two decades this model has been called "staff mix", "team nursing", "alternate models of care", "care delivery model redesign" and "workforce transformation" among others. The name is changed but the model remains the same. And on and on we go. We all know the definition of insanity...

Do we, as nurses, have a professional and ethical duty to combat this deliberate and insidious delegation of our core roles to lesser-skilled, lesser-educated, cheaper personnel? And what do we make the focus of our arguments? Of course we, as nurses, have both professional and ethical duties to our patients and the public at large. We can't make the "protecting our turf" aspect the basis for our debate; this tactic is universally viewed as distasteful and self-serving. However, keeping the patient at the center of our efforts, we are much more likely to capture the attention of the public, who represent our strongest, most effective allies.

The best, most effective method of getting our point across remains education of not only the Powers-That-Be but also the public and each other regarding the depth and breadth of our nursing practice. Over the years I've been told by numerous patients' parents (I have always worked in pediatrics) they had no idea how much nurses do in the day-to-day provision of health care, but their eyes had been opened. They commented on how rarely they spoke to - or even SAW - the most responsible physician, but they were always able to have their concerns addressed and their questions answered by their nurse. They commented on how much responsibility we carry and how our observations and actions have been integral to the patient's recovery.

Until and unless we nurses are able to clearly articulate exactly what we do and how we do it, the merry-go-round will continue its inexorable revolutions. It's very difficult to describe our role in health care and how we actually save lives and money but we have to find a way. Consumers of our services may eventually come to understand that we are not simply angels of mercy, physicians' handmaidens, task-driven routinized cogs in the wheel or bumwipers. We're actually the eyes, ears and hands of the physician, the voice of the patient and the backbone of the system. That's where we start.

Pediatric Critical Care Columnist

Certified Pediatric Critical Care Nurse and parent of multi-handicapped adult son, married to computer geek.

5 Articles   7,358 Posts

Share this post


Specializes in Peds, Med-Surg, Disaster Nsg, Parish Nsg.

Thanks for this EXCELLENT article!

You hit the nail right on the head. Maybe we need to take this hammer and knock some sense into the heads of the Powers-that-Be.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, PCVICU and peds oncology.

Thanks for the kind words, TN. I sort of rolled a number of my favorite themes into a single article at the suggestion of someone I'd been discussing this with. Glad you like the result.

I have been an RN for 19 years and I agree completely with your assessment of the situation, and of the need to effectively communicate our role as nurses to the public, while keeping the patient at the heart of our efforts.

Specializes in ICU.

There are lots of good points in this article.

As far as new grads of four year programs needing extended orientation goes, there are plenty of BSN programs out there that graduate nurses ready and able to start IVs, insert foleys, and even wash bottoms along with doing a full head to toe assessment.The job that finally hired me figured that out when my first preceptor at work decided I was capable of taking both of her patients myself and doing all of the assessments/charting/meds on my second day of orientation. Of course I didn't know everything, I'm not saying I did (I still don't!), but I am saying there are BSN programs out there that prepare their graduates to take a full load of patients with adequate supervision right out of school.

The biggest question is why, when there are programs that do teach their students adequate skills, do hospitals even hire graduates from substandard programs? You are absolutely right that it runs up costs hugely to orient new grads forever. So why hire these new grads that require long orientations? There is no nursing shortage. Hospitals are not forced to hire under-educated new employees. I think the problem lies with the hospitals. As long as programs can graduate students with sub-standard skills and their graduates are still able to find jobs after graduation, the program's numbers look good and they continue to operate the exact same way. If all of a sudden, the same program's graduates were unable to find jobs because hospitals refused to hire them, something would have to change.

There are lots of good points in this article.

As far as new grads of four year programs needing extended orientation goes, there are plenty of BSN programs out there that graduate nurses ready and able to start IVs, insert foleys, and even wash bottoms along with doing a full head to toe assessment.The job that finally hired me figured that out when my first preceptor at work decided I was capable of taking both of her patients myself and doing all of the assessments/charting/meds on my second day of orientation. Of course I didn't know everything, I'm not saying I did (I still don't!), but I am saying there are BSN programs out there that prepare their graduates to take a full load of patients with adequate supervision right out of school.

The biggest question is why, when there are programs that do teach their students adequate skills, do hospitals even hire graduates from substandard programs? You are absolutely right that it runs up costs hugely to orient new grads forever. So why hire these new grads that require long orientations? There is no nursing shortage. Hospitals are not forced to hire under-educated new employees. I think the problem lies with the hospitals. As long as programs can graduate students with sub-standard skills and their graduates are still able to find jobs after graduation, the program's numbers look good and they continue to operate the exact same way. If all of a sudden, the same program's graduates were unable to find jobs because hospitals refused to hire them, something would have to change.

I am not a nurse so please forgive me if this is a stupid question. Would the hospital know how good the program is???

Great article, as always you have a great way of articulating things. Thanks for the information.

Specializes in Acute Care, Rehab, Palliative.

You accept students from a certain program and the feedback from your preceptors will tell you how good the program is. Plus the word gets around. Although I find that it really depends on the student. One college my workplace deals with is hit and miss. Some of the students are great, but most are awful. One RN student, about two months away from graduation didn't know how to drain a catheter bag.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, PCVICU and peds oncology.
I am not a nurse so please forgive me if this is a stupid question. Would the hospital know how good the program is???

Not necessarily. If the person doing the preliminary screening of potential hires is not a nurse, they're only looking for key words in the candidate's resumé. Key words like "degree". So let's say the University of Lower Slobovia has a terrible reputation for turning out very unskilled nurses, but graduates from the program have degrees and have passed the registration exam - maybe on the third try and after spending a boat-load of money to the ubiquitous prep course industry in order to get there. The human resources recruiter has a list of key words, "degree", "registration", "geriatrics", "experience" and out of all the applicants, only Nancy Nurse, a Lower Slobovia U grad, has all four in her resumé. Her application is the only one passed on to the hiring manager who MUST fill the position or be forced to close beds, so despite her knowledge and experience regarding Lower Slob U's reputation she gives Nancy the job. And now the manager's budget is on the hook for maybe 16 weeks of orientation in order to have a nurse who is safe to work on her unit. See where it unravels?

Not necessarily. If the person doing the preliminary screening of potential hires is not a nurse, they're only looking for key words in the candidate's resumé. Key words like "degree". So let's say the University of Lower Slobovia has a terrible reputation for turning out very unskilled nurses, but graduates from the program have degrees and have passed the registration exam - maybe on the third try and after spending a boat-load of money to the ubiquitous prep course industry in order to get there. The human resources recruiter has a list of key words, "degree", "registration", "geriatrics", "experience" and out of all the applicants, only Nancy Nurse, a Lower Slobovia U grad, has all four in her resumé. Her application is the only one passed on to the hiring manager who MUST fill the position or be forced to close beds, so despite her knowledge and experience regarding Lower Slob U's reputation she gives Nancy the job. And now the manager's budget is on the hook for maybe 16 weeks of orientation in order to have a nurse who is safe to work on her unit. See where it unravels?

Yes, thank you. Again, your eloquence at articulating things is remarkable.

Specializes in Pediatrics, Emergency, Trauma.
There are lots of good points in this article.

As far as new grads of four year programs needing extended orientation goes, there are plenty of BSN programs out there that graduate nurses ready and able to start IVs, insert foleys, and even wash bottoms along with doing a full head to toe assessment.The job that finally hired me figured that out when my first preceptor at work decided I was capable of taking both of her patients myself and doing all of the assessments/charting/meds on my second day of orientation. Of course I didn't know everything, I'm not saying I did (I still don't!), but I am saying there are BSN programs out there that prepare their graduates to take a full load of patients with adequate supervision right out of school.

The biggest question is why, when there are programs that do teach their students adequate skills, do hospitals even hire graduates from substandard programs? You are absolutely right that it runs up costs hugely to orient new grads forever. So why hire these new grads that require long orientations? There is no nursing shortage. Hospitals are not forced to hire under-educated new employees. I think the problem lies with the hospitals. As long as programs can graduate students with sub-standard skills and their graduates are still able to find jobs after graduation, the program's numbers look good and they continue to operate the exact same way. If all of a sudden, the same program's graduates were unable to find jobs because hospitals refused to hire them, something would have to change.

Wish I could like this MORE.

Specializes in Psych, Corrections, Med-Surg, Ambulatory.

Excellent article. Sums it up precisely. A telltale sign the cycle is about to start over is the hiring or firing of aides. They hire aides so they can cut nursing positions. Then they let the aides go without replacing any nurses. Over time, you're doing more and more with less and less. I worked at a hospital once that bragged it was actually improving care by replacing nurses with aides. That was the "skill mix" era. I thought it was Orwellian.

Always nice to hear from a fellow Canadian, even though I've now done most of my nursing down here. Seems the problems are interchangeable, either side of the border.

Specializes in Acute Care, Rehab, Palliative.

We the unwilling,lead by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have had to do so much with so little,for so long, we are now qualified to do everything with nothing.

My favorite quote and it becomes truer all the time.