Ting Zhao, Shi Chen, Xiaohui Dong, Xianyin Lu, Xinyu Chen, Hang Li, Shirui Tang, Shasha Wen, Huanle Liu, Chaoming Hou, Jing Gao, Jing Yang
{"title":"护士道德敏感性水平:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ting Zhao, Shi Chen, Xiaohui Dong, Xianyin Lu, Xinyu Chen, Hang Li, Shirui Tang, Shasha Wen, Huanle Liu, Chaoming Hou, Jing Gao, Jing Yang","doi":"10.1186/s12912-025-02892-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nurses, the largest frontline healthcare group in the world, experience a high incidence of moral distress. Enhancing moral sensitivity (MS) can effectively alleviate this distress. However, MS levels among nurses have not been clearly defined. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the level of MS among nurses and provide evidence-based insights to improve their moral practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Medline, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Medical Journal Full Text Database, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey, from inception to December 31, 2024. Two reviewers (Ting Zhao and Shi Chen) independently screened the literature and extracted data. Their quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analyzed using Stata software (version 17.0) to synthesize the mean scores of the moral sensitivity questionnaire (MSQ). Subgroup and meta-regression analysis were performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 99 studies involving 29,387 nurses were included. The pooled mean score for MS was 4.49 [95% CI (4.29, 4.70)], indicating a moderate level. Meta-regression revealed the assessment instrument, country, and department as potential sources of heterogeneity. The mean scores by country were as follows: China (5.22), Korea (4.82), Iran (4.44), and Turkey (3.28). The scores for the different assessment instruments varied, with the MSQ-revised version (5.46) having the highest scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nurses demonstrated moderate MS levels, indicating opportunities for further improvement. This review offers useful insights for nurse managers and educators in shaping strategies to improve moral training.</p>","PeriodicalId":48580,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nursing","volume":"24 1","pages":"321"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The level of moral sensitivity among nurses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ting Zhao, Shi Chen, Xiaohui Dong, Xianyin Lu, Xinyu Chen, Hang Li, Shirui Tang, Shasha Wen, Huanle Liu, Chaoming Hou, Jing Gao, Jing Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12912-025-02892-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nurses, the largest frontline healthcare group in the world, experience a high incidence of moral distress. Enhancing moral sensitivity (MS) can effectively alleviate this distress. However, MS levels among nurses have not been clearly defined. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the level of MS among nurses and provide evidence-based insights to improve their moral practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Medline, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Medical Journal Full Text Database, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey, from inception to December 31, 2024. Two reviewers (Ting Zhao and Shi Chen) independently screened the literature and extracted data. Their quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analyzed using Stata software (version 17.0) to synthesize the mean scores of the moral sensitivity questionnaire (MSQ). Subgroup and meta-regression analysis were performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 99 studies involving 29,387 nurses were included. The pooled mean score for MS was 4.49 [95% CI (4.29, 4.70)], indicating a moderate level. Meta-regression revealed the assessment instrument, country, and department as potential sources of heterogeneity. The mean scores by country were as follows: China (5.22), Korea (4.82), Iran (4.44), and Turkey (3.28). The scores for the different assessment instruments varied, with the MSQ-revised version (5.46) having the highest scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nurses demonstrated moderate MS levels, indicating opportunities for further improvement. This review offers useful insights for nurse managers and educators in shaping strategies to improve moral training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Nursing\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938698/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-02892-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-02892-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:护士,世界上最大的一线医疗保健群体,经历了高发生率的道德困境。提高道德敏感性(MS)可以有效地缓解这种痛苦。然而,护士中的多发性硬化症水平尚未明确界定。因此,本研究旨在评估护士的MS水平,并为改善护士的道德实践提供循证见解。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase、Web of Science、CINAHL、Scopus、Medline、中国知识资源综合库、万方数据库、VIP数据库、中国生物医学数据库、中国医学期刊全文数据库、谷歌Scholar、OpenGrey等数据库,检索时间从成立至2024年12月31日。两位审稿人(Ting Zhao和Shi Chen)独立筛选文献和提取数据。他们的质量是用乔安娜布里格斯研究所的关键评估工具来评估的。采用Stata软件(17.0版)对数据进行分析,综合道德敏感性问卷(MSQ)的平均分。进行亚组和meta回归分析以确定异质性的来源,并进行敏感性分析以评估结果的稳健性。结果:共纳入99项研究,涉及29387名护士。MS的合并平均评分为4.49 [95% CI(4.29, 4.70)],表明中度水平。元回归显示评估工具、国家和部门是异质性的潜在来源。各国的平均分数依次为:中国(5.22分)、韩国(4.82分)、伊朗(4.44分)、土耳其(3.28分)。不同评估工具的得分各不相同,msq修订版本(5.46)的得分最高。结论:护士表现出中度多发性硬化症水平,提示进一步改善的机会。本综述为护士管理者和教育工作者提供了有益的见解,以制定策略,以提高道德培训。
The level of moral sensitivity among nurses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Nurses, the largest frontline healthcare group in the world, experience a high incidence of moral distress. Enhancing moral sensitivity (MS) can effectively alleviate this distress. However, MS levels among nurses have not been clearly defined. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the level of MS among nurses and provide evidence-based insights to improve their moral practices.
Methods: This review searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Medline, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Medical Journal Full Text Database, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey, from inception to December 31, 2024. Two reviewers (Ting Zhao and Shi Chen) independently screened the literature and extracted data. Their quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analyzed using Stata software (version 17.0) to synthesize the mean scores of the moral sensitivity questionnaire (MSQ). Subgroup and meta-regression analysis were performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the results.
Results: A total of 99 studies involving 29,387 nurses were included. The pooled mean score for MS was 4.49 [95% CI (4.29, 4.70)], indicating a moderate level. Meta-regression revealed the assessment instrument, country, and department as potential sources of heterogeneity. The mean scores by country were as follows: China (5.22), Korea (4.82), Iran (4.44), and Turkey (3.28). The scores for the different assessment instruments varied, with the MSQ-revised version (5.46) having the highest scores.
Conclusion: Nurses demonstrated moderate MS levels, indicating opportunities for further improvement. This review offers useful insights for nurse managers and educators in shaping strategies to improve moral training.
期刊介绍:
BMC Nursing is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of nursing research, training, education and practice.