Nursing Priority: The Mental Concept Internalised by Nurses and Nursing Students. A Qualitative Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54103/dn/29914Keywords:
nursing priority, clinical reasoning, decision making, prioritization, Nursing educationAbstract
BACKGROUND: Setting priorities is a fundamental aspect of nursing practice; however, both nurses and students often struggle to define and apply this concept. Existing literature tends to focus on urgency, relevance, or missed care, overlooking the cognitive processes involved in prioritisation.
METHODS: This qualitative study analysed open-ended survey responses from 104 participants -68 nursing students and 36 nurses- from two universities and three hospitals in Northern Italy. A combined deductive and inductive content analysis was used to explore how nursing priority is internalised and defined, which elements are considered in its identification, and what challenges are perceived in its application. This study adhered to the COREQ guidelines.
FINDINGS: Approximately half of the participants were unable to accurately define nursing priorities. Among those who could, nurses most frequently referred to urgency, while students emphasised relevance. Both groups identified patient needs and autonomy, observation, and communication as key elements in prioritising patient care. Reported challenges included patient complexity, simultaneous emergencies, and communication difficulties. Few participants applied comprehensive frameworks, suggesting a gap between theoretical instruction and clinical practice.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights a widespread difficulty in conceptualising and operationalising nursing priorities, consistent with international findings. Educational and organisational interventions are needed to support nurses and students in managing complexity and improving decision-making. Enhancing conceptual clarity and reasoning skills in nursing curricula can reduce missed care, improve patient outcomes, and mitigate nurse burnout. These findings underscore the importance of updating educational models and clinical tools to better reflect the realities of nursing practice.
Downloads
References
1. Alfaro-LeFevre R. Thinking Critically About Your Assignments. Nurse Educ. 2001 Feb;26(1):15.
2. Hackman P, Häggman-Laitila A, Hult M. Prioritization decision-making of care in nursing homes: A qualitative study. Nurs Ethics. 2024;32(1):42–55.
3. Stemmer R, Bassi E, Ezra S, Harvey C, Jojo N, Meyer G, et al. A systematic review: Unfinished nursing care and the impact on the nurse outcomes of job satisfaction, burnout, intention-to-leave and turnover. J Adv Nurs. 2022;78(8):2290–303.
4. Cherubini P, Mazzocco K, Rumiati R. Rethinking the focusing effect in decision-making. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003 May 1;113(1):67–81.
5. Jala S, Fry M, Elliott R. Cognitive bias during clinical decision-making and its influence on patient outcomes in the emergency department: A scoping review. J Clin Nurs. 2023;32(19–20):7076–85.
6. Mazzocco K, Masiero M, Carriero MC, Pravettoni G. The role of emotions in cancer patients’ decision-making. ecancermedicalscience. 2019 Mar 28;13:914.
7. Croskerry P. Clinical cognition and diagnostic error: applications of a dual process model of reasoning. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2009 Sept 1;14(1):27–35.
8. Evans, J. S. B. T. How many dual-process theories do we need? One, two, or many? In: In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford University Press; 2009.
9. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. In: Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making [Internet]. WORLD SCIENTIFIC; 2012 [cited 2025 Feb 3]. p. 99–127. (World Scientific Handbook in Financial Economics Series; vol. Volume 4). Available from: https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814417358_0006
10. Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62(1):107–15.
11. Papathanasiou I, Tzenetidis V, Tsaras K, Zyga S, Malliarou M. Missed Nursing Care; Prioritizing the Patient’s Needs: An Umbrella Review. Healthc Basel Switz. 2024 Jan 16;12(2):224.
12. Yuan Z, Wang J, Feng F, Jin M, Xie W, He H, et al. The levels and related factors of mental workload among nurses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Pract. 2023;29(5):e13148.
13. Milani A, Misurelli E, Bottaccioli AG, Bottaccioli F, Lacapra S, Ciccarelli C, et al. The iceberg of genomics: New perspectives in the use of genomics and epigenetics in oncology nursing clinical reasoning. A discursive paper. J Adv Nurs. 2023 Dec;79(12):4560–7.
14. Milani A, Saiani L, Misurelli E, Lacapra S, Pravettoni G, Magon G, et al. The relevance of the contribution of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology and psychology of reasoning and decision making to nursing science: A discursive paper. J Adv Nurs. 2024;80(7):2943–57.
15. Suhonen R, Stolt M, Habermann M, Hjaltadottir I, Vryonides S, Tonnessen S, et al. Ethical elements in priority setting in nursing care: A scoping review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Dec 1;88:25–42.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alessandra Milani, Eliana Misurelli, Luisa Saiani, Maria Grazia Ghitti, Silvana Lacapra, Claudia Cafiero, Maura Lusignani, Giorgio Magon, Ketti Mazzocco

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Accepted 2026-01-10
Published 2026-01-31





