How nursing practice environments limit implicit rationing of care and nurse-assessed adverse events: the role of flow at work

Table 5 Estimates from the structural analysis (N = 231)

Effect	β	S.E	t	P	BC 95% CI
Effect	β	S.E	t	P	Lower/Upper
Direct effect
Nursing practice environment to flow at work	0.64	0.13	7.01	< 0.001	0.52/0.75
Nursing practice environment to IRNC	-0.23	0.12	-2.47	0.014	-0.42/-0.04
Nursing practice environment to APE	-0.35	0.22	-3.79	< 0.001	-0.52/-0.18
Flow at work to IRNC	-0.30	0.83	-3.04	0.002	-0.47/-0.12
Flow at work to APE	-0.29	0.16	-3.03	0.002	-0.47/-0.09
Indirect effect
Practice environment → flow → IRNC	-0.24			0.001	-0.43 /-0.09
Practice environment → flow → APE	-0.44			0.003	-0.79 /-0.16

Standardized coefficients are reported
APE Adverse patient events, BC Bias-corrected, CI Confidence interval, IRNC Implicit rationing of nursing care, S.E Standard error

ISSN: 1472-6955