Elina Mattila, Paula Heikkilä, Eeva Harju, Tiina Kortteisto, Marja Kaunonen, Minna Sorsa, Elina Haavisto
{"title":"医院护理干预的有效性：总体回顾。","authors":"Elina Mattila, Paula Heikkilä, Eeva Harju, Tiina Kortteisto, Marja Kaunonen, Minna Sorsa, Elina Haavisto","doi":"10.1111/jocn.17766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this umbrella review was to summarise the existing evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions targeted at adult patients in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Existing systematic reviews were synthesised.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The literature search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL Complete, and the Cochrane Library by two of the authors until June 6th 2024 without a time limit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 2652 records were identified. After screening the titles and abstracts, 2421 records were excluded. Then two records were excluded as they were not retrieved, and 125 records were excluded during full-text review as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, 11 reviews (141 original studies) were included in the quality assessment and were analysed narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most commonly used interventions were educational, followed by preventive, observative, or combinations of various interventions. All interventions were targeted at the care of somatic patients. The interventions lacked detailed descriptions of their content and duration. Nursing interventions were found to reduce anxiety, depression, disorder symptoms, pain intensity, length of hospital stay, serious adverse effects, mortality, infections and pressure ulcer prevalence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is limited high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions used by nurses at hospital settings. While nursing interventions can improve hospital patient outcomes, more high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed. Only preventive interventions (such as pressure ulcer prevention and use of early warning scores) consistently showed positive effects and are relatively easy to implement in hospital nursing practice. Other interventions are not yet widely integrated into standard care in hospitals. It is necessary to study the cost-effectiveness of nursing interventions.</p><p><strong>No patient or public contributions: </strong>This umbrella review did not include any patient or public involvement.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This umbrella review of systematic reviews adheres to the PRISMA statement.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effectiveness of Nursing Interventions in Hospital: An Umbrella Review.\",\"authors\":\"Elina Mattila, Paula Heikkilä, Eeva Harju, Tiina Kortteisto, Marja Kaunonen, Minna Sorsa, Elina Haavisto\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jocn.17766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this umbrella review was to summarise the existing evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions targeted at adult patients in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Existing systematic reviews were synthesised.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The literature search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL Complete, and the Cochrane Library by two of the authors until June 6th 2024 without a time limit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 2652 records were identified. After screening the titles and abstracts, 2421 records were excluded. Then two records were excluded as they were not retrieved, and 125 records were excluded during full-text review as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, 11 reviews (141 original studies) were included in the quality assessment and were analysed narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most commonly used interventions were educational, followed by preventive, observative, or combinations of various interventions. All interventions were targeted at the care of somatic patients. The interventions lacked detailed descriptions of their content and duration. Nursing interventions were found to reduce anxiety, depression, disorder symptoms, pain intensity, length of hospital stay, serious adverse effects, mortality, infections and pressure ulcer prevalence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is limited high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions used by nurses at hospital settings. While nursing interventions can improve hospital patient outcomes, more high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed. Only preventive interventions (such as pressure ulcer prevention and use of early warning scores) consistently showed positive effects and are relatively easy to implement in hospital nursing practice. Other interventions are not yet widely integrated into standard care in hospitals. It is necessary to study the cost-effectiveness of nursing interventions.</p><p><strong>No patient or public contributions: </strong>This umbrella review did not include any patient or public involvement.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This umbrella review of systematic reviews adheres to the PRISMA statement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17766\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17766","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Effectiveness of Nursing Interventions in Hospital: An Umbrella Review.
Aim: The aim of this umbrella review was to summarise the existing evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions targeted at adult patients in hospitals.
Design: Existing systematic reviews were synthesised.
Data sources: The literature search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL Complete, and the Cochrane Library by two of the authors until June 6th 2024 without a time limit.
Methods: A total of 2652 records were identified. After screening the titles and abstracts, 2421 records were excluded. Then two records were excluded as they were not retrieved, and 125 records were excluded during full-text review as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, 11 reviews (141 original studies) were included in the quality assessment and were analysed narratively.
Results: The most commonly used interventions were educational, followed by preventive, observative, or combinations of various interventions. All interventions were targeted at the care of somatic patients. The interventions lacked detailed descriptions of their content and duration. Nursing interventions were found to reduce anxiety, depression, disorder symptoms, pain intensity, length of hospital stay, serious adverse effects, mortality, infections and pressure ulcer prevalence.
Conclusions: There is limited high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of nursing interventions used by nurses at hospital settings. While nursing interventions can improve hospital patient outcomes, more high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed. Only preventive interventions (such as pressure ulcer prevention and use of early warning scores) consistently showed positive effects and are relatively easy to implement in hospital nursing practice. Other interventions are not yet widely integrated into standard care in hospitals. It is necessary to study the cost-effectiveness of nursing interventions.
No patient or public contributions: This umbrella review did not include any patient or public involvement.
Reporting method: This umbrella review of systematic reviews adheres to the PRISMA statement.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice.
JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice.
We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
