Clinical validation of "spiritual distress (00066)" in parents of children with chronic diseases.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Fateme Eshghi, Azam Shirinabadi Farahani, Armin Zareiyan
{"title":"Clinical validation of \"spiritual distress (00066)\" in parents of children with chronic diseases.","authors":"Fateme Eshghi, Azam Shirinabadi Farahani, Armin Zareiyan","doi":"10.1111/2047-3095.12486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to determine the clinical validation of the nursing diagnosis (ND) of \"spiritual distress (00066)\" and the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and predictive value in parents of children with chronic diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study was conducted using the clinical diagnostic validity method proposed by Fehring. The data were collected through structured interviews and using a researcher-made list that included 5 parts of demographic information, parents' opinions about spiritual distress, the researcher's diagnosis, 74 defining characteristics (DCs) of the ND of spiritual distress, and the Spiritual Well-being Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics as well as sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and predictive value.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The prevalence of diagnosis was 70% in a sample of 120 parents. Out of the 74 DCs, 39 criteria were validated. Questioning meaning of illness and suffering had the highest sensitivity (98.8%), the highest negative predictive value (88.88%), and the lowest negative likelihood ratio (0.05%). Expressing the lack of meaning in life demonstrated the highest specificity (97.22%), the highest positive predictive value (98.33%), and the highest positive likelihood ratio (25.26%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Parents who search for meaning of illness and suffering related to a lack of meaning in life are in spiritual distress. The ND was validated.</p><p><strong>Implications for nursing practice: </strong>These findings can empower clinical nurses to confidently assess and identify patients experiencing spiritual distress, bridging the gaps caused by the absence of standardized tools for assessing spiritual distress in the inpatient setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":49051,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-3095.12486","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the clinical validation of the nursing diagnosis (ND) of "spiritual distress (00066)" and the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and predictive value in parents of children with chronic diseases.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted using the clinical diagnostic validity method proposed by Fehring. The data were collected through structured interviews and using a researcher-made list that included 5 parts of demographic information, parents' opinions about spiritual distress, the researcher's diagnosis, 74 defining characteristics (DCs) of the ND of spiritual distress, and the Spiritual Well-being Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics as well as sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and predictive value.

Findings: The prevalence of diagnosis was 70% in a sample of 120 parents. Out of the 74 DCs, 39 criteria were validated. Questioning meaning of illness and suffering had the highest sensitivity (98.8%), the highest negative predictive value (88.88%), and the lowest negative likelihood ratio (0.05%). Expressing the lack of meaning in life demonstrated the highest specificity (97.22%), the highest positive predictive value (98.33%), and the highest positive likelihood ratio (25.26%).

Conclusions: Parents who search for meaning of illness and suffering related to a lack of meaning in life are in spiritual distress. The ND was validated.

Implications for nursing practice: These findings can empower clinical nurses to confidently assess and identify patients experiencing spiritual distress, bridging the gaps caused by the absence of standardized tools for assessing spiritual distress in the inpatient setting.

慢性病患儿父母 "精神痛苦(00066)"的临床验证。
目的:本研究旨在确定 "精神痛苦(00066)"护理诊断(ND)的临床有效性,以及其在慢性病患儿家长中的敏感性、特异性、似然比和预测值:这项横断面研究采用了 Fehring 提出的临床诊断有效性方法。数据通过结构化访谈和研究者自制的清单收集,清单包括人口统计学信息、家长对精神痛苦的看法、研究者的诊断、74 个精神痛苦玖级定义特征(DCs)和精神幸福感问卷 5 部分。数据采用描述性统计以及敏感性、特异性、似然比和预测值进行分析:在 120 位家长的样本中,诊断率为 70%。在 74 项精神健康标准中,有 39 项标准得到了验证。质疑疾病和痛苦的意义具有最高的灵敏度(98.8%)、最高的阴性预测值(88.88%)和最低的阴性似然比(0.05%)。表示生活缺乏意义的特异性最高(97.22%),阳性预测值最高(98.33%),阳性似然比最高(25.26%):结论:因缺乏生活意义而寻找疾病和痛苦意义的父母正处于精神痛苦之中。ND得到了验证:这些研究结果可以增强临床护士的能力,使其能够自信地评估和识别经历精神痛苦的患者,弥补住院环境中缺乏评估精神痛苦的标准化工具所造成的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Nursing Knowledge, the official journal of NANDA International, is a peer-reviewed publication for key professionals committed to discovering, understanding and disseminating nursing knowledge. The Journal aims to clarify the knowledge base of nursing and improve patient safety by developing and disseminating nursing diagnoses and standardized nursing languages, and promoting their clinical use. It seeks to encourage education in clinical reasoning, diagnosis, and assessment and ensure global consistency in conceptual languages. The International Journal of Nursing Knowledge is an essential information resource for healthcare professionals concerned with developing nursing knowledge and /or clinical applications of standardized nursing languages in nursing research, education, practice, and policy. The Journal accepts papers which contribute significantly to international nursing knowledge, including concept analyses, original and applied research, review articles and international and historical perspectives, and welcomes articles discussing clinical challenges and guidelines, education initiatives, and policy initiatives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信