Suppr超能文献

长期机构护理中护理人员与护理敏感结局相关性的系统评价。

A systematic review of the association between nursing staff and nursing-sensitive outcomes in long-term institutional care.

机构信息

Department of Health and Well-being, Windesheim University of Applied Sciences, Zwolle, The Netherlands.

Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Adv Nurs. 2021 Aug;77(8):3303-3316. doi: 10.1111/jan.14840. Epub 2021 Mar 25.

Abstract

AIMS

To examine the association between type of nursing staff and nursing-sensitive outcomes in long-term institutional care.

DESIGN

This systematic review included studies published in English, German, and Dutch between January 1997 and January 2020.

DATA SOURCES

The databases Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Original quantitative studies were included.

REVIEW METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist was used to critically appraise the reporting of the studies.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles were included. Of 33 quality of care outcomes, 21 were identified as nursing-sensitive outcomes of which 13 showed a significant association with nursing staff, specifically: Activities of daily living, aggressive behavior, bladder/bowel incontinence, contractures, expressive language skills, falls, infection (including vaccination), range of motion, pain, pressure ulcers, and weight loss. However, studies reported inconsistent results regarding the association among RNs, LPNs, CNAs, and HCAs and these nursing-sensitive outcomes, evidence shows that more RNs have a positive impact on nursing-sensitive outcomes. As to the evidence regarding the other type of nursing staff, especially HCA, findings regularly showed a negative association.

CONCLUSION

Future research should be expanded with structure and process variables of which the mediating and moderating effect on nursing-sensitive outcomes is known. These may explain variances in quality of care and guide quality improvement initiatives. Researchers should consider fully applying Donabedian's structure-process-outcomes framework as it is a coherent entirety for quality assessment.

IMPACT

This review provides an overview of quality of care outcomes that are responsive to nursing interventions in long-term institutional care. As the effects can be monitored and documented, quality assessment should focus on these nursing-sensitive outcomes. The inconclusive results make it difficult to provide recommendations on who should best perform which care.

摘要

目的

研究长期机构护理中护理人员类型与护理敏感结局之间的关系。

设计

本系统评价纳入了 1997 年 1 月至 2020 年 1 月期间以英文、德文和荷兰文发表的研究。

数据来源

检索了 Medline(PubMed)、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库。纳入了原始的定量研究。

综述方法

遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的 Preferred Reporting Items(PRISMA)指南。使用 Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology(STROBE)清单对研究报告进行严格评估。

结果

共纳入 15 篇文章。在 33 项护理质量结果中,有 21 项被确定为护理敏感结局,其中 13 项与护理人员有显著关联,具体包括:日常生活活动、攻击性行为、膀胱/肠道失禁、挛缩、表达性语言技能、跌倒、感染(包括疫苗接种)、活动范围、疼痛、压疮和体重减轻。然而,关于注册护士、执业护师、注册护士助理和助手与这些护理敏感结局之间的关联,研究报告的结果不一致,有证据表明,拥有更多注册护士对护理敏感结局有积极影响。至于其他类型护理人员(特别是助手)的证据,结果通常显示出负面关联。

结论

未来的研究应该扩大范围,纳入结构和过程变量,这些变量对护理敏感结局的中介和调节作用是已知的。这可以解释护理质量的差异,并指导质量改进措施。研究人员应考虑充分应用 Donabedian 的结构-过程-结果框架,因为它是一个完整的质量评估体系。

影响

本综述提供了长期机构护理中对护理干预有反应的护理质量结果概述。由于这些结果可以进行监测和记录,因此质量评估应重点关注这些护理敏感结局。由于结果不确定,因此很难就谁最适合执行何种护理提出建议。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验