Wang Xinxia, Rihari-Thomas John, Bail Kasia, Bala Nina, Traynor Victoria
School of Nursing, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
J Adv Nurs. 2025 Sep;81(9):5264-5290. doi: 10.1111/jan.16358. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
To critically evaluate missed care measurement approaches and their application in long-term aged care (LTAC) settings.
Systematic review using Tawfik's guideline.
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and ProQuest were searched. Supplemental searching was from reference lists of retrieved records, first authors' ORCID homepages and Google advanced search for grey literature. Search limitations were English language, published between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2022.
COVIDENCE was utilized for screening, data extraction and quality appraisal. JBI Critical Appraisal Tools and COSMIN Risk of Bias Tool were used for quality appraisal. Data were summarized and synthesized using narrative analysis.
Twenty-four publications across 11 regions were included, with two principal methods of missed care measurement: modified standard scales and tailored specific approaches. They were applied inconsistently and generated diverse measurement outcomes. There were challenges even with the most commonly used tool, the BERNCA-NH, including absence of high-quality verification through comparative analysis against an established 'gold standard', reliance on self-administration, incomplete assessment of constructs and inadequate exploration of psychometric properties.
Globally, there are deficiencies in the effectiveness and comprehensiveness of the instruments measuring missed care in LTAC settings. Further research on theoretical and practical perspectives is required.
Findings highlighted a critical need to establish a standardized, validated approach to measure missed care in LTAC settings. This review calls for collaborative efforts by researchers, clinical staff and policymakers to develop and implement evidence-based practices as a way of safeguarding the well-being of older clients living in LTAC settings.
Measurements of missed care in LTAC settings rely on adapting acute care tools. There is a critical gap in measuring missed care in LTAC settings. Developing a new tool could improve care quality and safety in LTAC settings globally.
Adhered to PRISMA guideline.
No patient or public contribution.
严格评估漏护测量方法及其在长期老年护理(LTAC)机构中的应用。
采用陶菲克指南进行系统综述。
检索了PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、CINAHL和ProQuest。补充检索来自检索记录的参考文献列表、第一作者的ORCID主页以及谷歌高级搜索灰色文献。检索限制为2001年1月1日至2022年12月31日期间发表的英文文献。
利用COVIDENCE进行筛选、数据提取和质量评估。使用JBI批判性评估工具和COSMIN偏倚风险工具进行质量评估。采用叙述性分析对数据进行总结和综合。
纳入了来自11个地区的24篇出版物,有两种主要的漏护测量方法:改良标准量表和定制特定方法。这些方法应用不一致,产生了不同的测量结果。即使是最常用的工具BERNCA-NH也存在挑战,包括缺乏通过与既定“金标准”进行比较分析的高质量验证、依赖自我管理、对结构的评估不完整以及对心理测量特性的探索不足。
在全球范围内,LTAC机构中测量漏护的工具在有效性和全面性方面存在不足。需要从理论和实践角度进行进一步研究。
研究结果凸显了在LTAC机构中建立标准化、经过验证的漏护测量方法的迫切需求。本综述呼吁研究人员、临床工作人员和政策制定者共同努力,制定和实施基于证据的实践,以保障生活在LTAC机构中的老年客户的福祉。
LTAC机构中漏护的测量依赖于改编急性护理工具。LTAC机构中漏护测量存在重大差距。开发一种新工具可以提高全球LTAC机构的护理质量和安全性。
遵循PRISMA指南。
无患者或公众贡献。