Technological innovation for workload allocation in nursing care management: an integrative review [version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 2 approved with reservations]

Background Technology reduces the nursing workload, improve the quality care processes, patient's safety, and avoid staff burnout. Innovative technologies are disrupting healthcare systems by improving the efficiency of processes and management. There is a discussion on the benefits, challenges, and barriers of these technologies and considering human factors of nursing management. The aim was to analyze the influence of technologies on the distribution of workload for nursing care management. Methods An integrative literature review was performed. Four databases were searched: Scopus, Scielo, PUBMED, and CINALH following PRISMA guidelines. Articles published from January 2016 to December 2020, published in English, Spanish and Portuguese were included. Studies were excluded when they were not original research, did not met the quality criteria or they did not answer the research questions. Quality appraisal was performed using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool version 1.4 (CCAT). Two reviewers independently examined the title and abstract for eligibility according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results 2818 potentially relevant articles were found, but once the inclusion and exclusion criteria in the abstracts were analyzed, 177 remained for evaluation. After following the PRISMA Guidelines, 35 studies were included in the review. Three categories were identified: Nursing workload; Information technologies and technological means for management; Technology acceptance. Conclusions Technology has the potential to improve care management by estimating nurse workload in ICUs and non-critical units, but scientific evidence is more detailed in the former type of services. The literature provides insights about the factors that factors and the barriers that promote the technology acceptance and usability. We did not find studies comparing technologies and no scientific evidence proving improvements in care.