Understanding nurses’ dual practice: a scoping review of what we know and what we still need to ask on nurses holding multiple jobs
Open Access
- 22 February 2018
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Human Resources for Health
- Vol. 16 (1) , 14
Abstract
Mounting evidence suggests that holding multiple concurrent jobs in public and private (dual practice) is common among health workers in low- as well as high-income countries. Nurses are world’s largest health professional workforce and a critical resource for achieving Universal Health Coverage. Nonetheless, little is known about nurses’ engagement with dual practice. We conducted a scoping review of the literature on nurses’ dual practice with the objective of generating hypotheses on its nature and consequences, and define a research agenda on the phenomenon. The Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological steps were followed to develop the research questions, identify relevant studies, include/exclude studies, extract the data, and report the findings. PRISMA guidelines were additionally used to conduct the review and report on results. Of the initial 194 records identified, a total of 35 met the inclusion criteria for nurses’ dual practice; the vast majority (65%) were peer-reviewed publications, followed by nursing magazine publications (19%), reports, and doctoral dissertations. Twenty publications focused on high-income countries, 16 on low- or middle-income ones, and two had a multi country perspective. Although holding multiple jobs not always amounted to dual practice, several ways were found for public-sector nurses to engage concomitantly in public and private employments, in regulated as well as in informal, casual fashions. Some of these forms were reported as particularly prevalent, from over 50% in Australia, Canada, and the UK, to 28% in South Africa. The opportunity to increase a meagre salary, but also a dissatisfaction with the main job and the flexibility offered by multiple job-holding arrangements, were among the reported reasons for engaging in these practices. Limited and mostly circumstantial evidence exists on nurses’ dual practice, with the few existing studies suggesting that the phenomenon is likely to be very common and carry implications for health systems and nurses’ welfare worldwide. We offer an agenda for future research to consolidate the existing evidence and to further explore nurses’ motivation; without a better understanding of nurse dual practice, this will continue to be a largely ‘hidden’ element in nursing workforce policy and practice, with an unclear impact on the delivery of care.Keywords
This publication has 55 references indexed in Scilit:
- Access to non-pecuniary benefits: does gender matter? Evidence from six low- and middle-income countriesHuman Resources for Health, 2011
- Nurses’ Widespread Job Dissatisfaction, Burnout, And Frustration With Health Benefits Signal Problems For Patient CareHealth Affairs, 2011
- Priorities for research into human resources for health in low- and middle-income countriesBulletin of the World Health Organization, 2010
- The intensive care unit work environment: Current challenges and recommendations for the futureJournal of Critical Care, 2009
- Assessment of human resources for health using cross-national comparison of facility surveys in six countriesHuman Resources for Health, 2009
- Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health servicesHealth Research Policy and Systems, 2008
- Policy and regulatory responses to dual practice in the health sectorHealth Policy, 2007
- U.S. Nurse Labor Market Dynamics Are Key to Global Nurse SufficiencyHealth Services Research, 2007
- Physician dual practiceHealth Policy, 2006
- Three Approaches to Qualitative Content AnalysisQualitative Health Research, 2005