Table 2 Workload and factors related to workload (arranged by publication year)

[38] Harrold J. 2014

Nº visits/day

Increased workload: age < 65, sex male, primary caregiver non spouse, lower Palliative Performance Scale, presence of pain, admitted from a hospital, admitting diagnosis, more than one diagnosis, have a foley catheter, feeding tube, oxygen, pressure ulcer or intravenous access, weekend admission

[42] Holm SG. 2014

Indirect care time/Total care time

Increased workload: more driving time, including transfer time, and more time required to document details of the care given

[27] Montalto M, 2010

Lenght of stay/patient (days/patient)

Higher workload: referred from Hospital wards

[43] Vecchio N. 2007

Care time/patient

Increased workload: ONI: decreasing functional profile and male gender; no nursing services was also associated with increasing allied health time. OPR was found to be less effective as a predictor

[39] Adams CE. 2001

Direct care time (min)/visit

Living in a rural locale increased total direct care time by an average of 150 min after patient characteristics and health status were controlled, in comparison to living in an urban locale

[28] Adams CE. 2000

Direct care time (min/visit

Across the five diagnostic categories, the average RN visit duration of the studies ranged from 48 min in patients with diabetes mellitus and pneumonia to 55 min in orthopedic patients

[29] Lee TT. 2000

Resources utilization (Nº of RN visits, RN hours of care, episode of care and type and number of nursing interventions)/patient

Increased workload: total number of nursing diagnoses and two specific nursing diagnoses (alteration in mobility and knowledge deficit in IV therapy) were strong predictors of overall resource use

[30] Payne SM. 1998

Care time (min)/visit home

Increased workload: admission visit (versus continuing, readmission, or discharge), terminal/care giver factor, and higher Clinical Instability Factor

[31] Hays BJ. 1995

Direct hours of nursing care in the home/patient; mean visit lenght/visit

CHIRS explained a significant (p < 0,001) amount of variation in nursing resource consumption; Omaha PCS significantly predicted direct hours of nursing care

[32] Bonifassi L. 1994

Nº visits/patient/day; Care time/patient/day

Increased workload: lower Karnofsky index, reasons for hospitalization: end of life care

[44] Trisolini MG. 1994

Nursing time/visit

Increased workload: provider-related: new admission; patient-related: zip code, physical therapy/ occupational therapy/ speech therapy support services-receives some of needed; visit-specific: medication problems-prefill, lengthy education, number of telephone calls, expected post-visit telephone calls, expected post-visit paperwork-physician´s orders

[40] Tiesinga L J. 1994

Average visit time per patient

Separates activities explain more variance (39%) of the average visit time per patient than activity categories (29%) or the care types (13%). Of the 87 activities analysed 19 activities were relevant. The activities explain the average visiting time per patient better than the developed care types do

[33] Churness VH. 1991

Direct and indirect nursing care time/visit

The relationship between total score and length of home visits was direct; at best only 46–64% of the variation length among home visits can be accounted for. This instrument can be a useful tool in measuring nurse workload after appropriate adaptations in the specific setting in which it will be used

[34] Cox CL. 1990

Nº visits/patient/episode; Frequency and duration of nurse visits/patient

The only variables that predicted days of service and use of resources were self-care capacity (inability to assume self-care predicted an increase), agency admission diagnoses (neoplasia predicted a decrease), and readmission diagnoses hospital (kidney disease predicted a decrease)

[35] Williams BC. 1990

Nº visits/case/week (Intensity of service)

For intensity of service: ≥ 75 age, and diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs (lower); Diagnosis categories injury and poisoning, diseases of the skin, and the prognosis category good (higher)

[36] Peters DA. 1988

Nº visits/case

CHIRS rating and number of nursing visits were positive correlated (r = 0.39, p = .000)

[37] Stark AJ. 1984

Nº contacts/client

The final analysis showed that age was the only independent variable: the number of contacts increases with age

[41] Ballard S. 1983

Nursing visits/patient/day

All of the variables were significant and the overall variance accounted for was 19.5%. The Health Status Scale, which measured deficits in daily activities and nursing problems, proved to be the best predictor for agency visits (the higher the score, the greater the use of resources) and contributed to 8% of the variance