Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, South Cloisters, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK.
J Clin Nurs. 2018 Jun;27(11-12):2179-2188. doi: 10.1111/jocn.14150. Epub 2018 Jan 10.
To determine the effects of nursing interventions for people's nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene needs.
Patient experience of health care is sensitive to nursing quality. A refocus on fundamental nursing care is undermined by lack of evidence of effectiveness for interventions in core areas such as elimination, nutrition, mobility and hygiene.
Systematic review.
We searched for and included experimental studies on interventions by professionally qualified and unregistered nurses that addressed participants' nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene needs. We extracted data on scope, quality and results of studies followed by descriptive narrative synthesis of included study outcomes using a novel form of harvest plots.
We included 149 studies, 35 nutrition, 56 elimination, 16 mobility, 39 hygiene and three addressing two or more areas simultaneously (67 randomised controlled trials, 32 non-randomised controlled trials and 50 uncontrolled trials). Studies into interventions on participant self-management of nutrition (n = 25), oral health (n = 26), catheter care (n = 23) and self-management of elimination (n = 21) were the most prevalent. Most studies focussed their outcomes on observational or physiological measures, with very few collecting patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life, experience or self-reported symptoms. All but 13 studies were of low quality and at significant risk of bias. The majority of studies did not define primary outcomes, included multiple measures of identical concepts, used inappropriate analyses and did not conform to standard reporting quality criteria.
The current evidence for fundamental nursing care interventions is sparse, of poor quality and unfit to provide evidence-based guidance to practising nurses.
Researchers in nursing internationally should now undertake a programme of work to produce evidence for clinical practice in the fundamentals of care that is reliable, replicable and robust.
确定护理干预对人们营养、排泄、活动和卫生需求的影响。
患者对医疗保健的体验对护理质量很敏感。由于缺乏核心领域(如排泄、营养、活动和卫生)干预措施有效性的证据,对基本护理的重新关注受到了阻碍。
系统评价。
我们搜索并纳入了由专业合格和非注册护士实施的干预措施的实验研究,这些研究涉及参与者的营养、排泄、活动和卫生需求。我们提取了关于研究范围、质量和结果的数据,然后使用一种新颖的收获图形式对纳入研究结果进行描述性叙述性综合。
我们纳入了 149 项研究,其中 35 项关于营养,56 项关于排泄,16 项关于活动,39 项关于卫生,3 项同时涉及两个或更多领域(67 项随机对照试验,32 项非随机对照试验和 50 项非对照试验)。关于参与者营养自我管理(n=25)、口腔健康(n=26)、导管护理(n=23)和排泄自我管理(n=21)的干预措施研究最为普遍。大多数研究将其结果集中在观察或生理测量上,很少收集患者报告的结果,如生活质量、体验或自我报告的症状。除 13 项研究外,其余研究质量均较低,存在严重偏倚风险。大多数研究没有定义主要结局,包括相同概念的多个测量,使用了不适当的分析方法,并且不符合标准报告质量标准。
目前关于基本护理干预措施的证据很少,质量差,无法为执业护士提供循证指导。
国际护理研究人员现在应该开展一项工作方案,为护理基础的临床实践提供可靠、可复制和稳健的证据。