Suppr超能文献

护理质量评估工具:迈向验证阶段

Quality assessment instruments in nursing: towards validation.

作者信息

Redfern S J, Norman I J

机构信息

Nursing Research Unit, King's College, University of London, U.K.

出版信息

Int J Nurs Stud. 1995 Apr;32(2):115-25. doi: 10.1016/0020-7489(94)00042-i.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore the validity of the nursing quality assessment instruments, Monitor, Senior Monitor and Qualpacs. This follows recommendations in the literature for the need for more comprehensive validation of instruments than has been the case hitherto. A multiple triangulation research design was used which included observation of and interviews with nurses and patients as well as administration of the instruments with the same patients and a questionnaire completed by the nurses in charge on ward organisation and their approach to nursing care. Results reported here focus on our experiences of using the instruments, their inter-rater reliability and comparisons of instrument scores within medical, surgical and elderly care wards. Difficulties were encountered in using the instruments but most of these can be overcome given sufficient time for preliminary discussions. Inter-rater reliability of all three instruments taken as a whole reached acceptable levels, although some of the section score correlation coefficients were low, especially for Qualpacs. Convergent validity was achieved for the Senior Monitor-Qualpacs comparisons in four elderly care wards. The results were less clear for the Monitor-Qualpacs comparisons in seven medical and surgical wards. Explanations for the equivocal results are suggested and subsequent hypotheses were tested which supported these explanations.

摘要

本研究的目的是探讨护理质量评估工具Monitor、高级Monitor和Qualpacs的有效性。这是遵循文献中的建议,即需要对工具进行比以往更全面的验证。本研究采用了多重三角验证研究设计,包括对护士和患者的观察与访谈,以及让同一批患者使用这些工具,并由负责病房组织和护理方法的护士填写一份问卷。此处报告的结果聚焦于我们使用这些工具的经验、它们的评分者间信度,以及在医疗、外科和老年护理病房内工具得分的比较。在使用这些工具时遇到了困难,但如果有足够的时间进行初步讨论,大多数困难是可以克服的。尽管部分分项得分的相关系数较低,尤其是Qualpacs,但将这三种工具整体来看,其评分者间信度达到了可接受的水平。在四个老年护理病房中,高级Monitor与Qualpacs的比较实现了收敛效度。在七个医疗和外科病房中,Monitor与Qualpacs的比较结果则不太明确。文中对这些模糊结果给出了解释,并对后续假设进行了检验,这些检验支持了这些解释。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验