Hongyue Ge, Qiao Wang, Sibo Liu, Yanbin Tian, Jie Ma
{"title":"使用移动护理信息系统评估临床护理过程质量指标体系的开发与验证。","authors":"Hongyue Ge, Qiao Wang, Sibo Liu, Yanbin Tian, Jie Ma","doi":"10.2147/JMDH.S512781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop and validate a standardized indicator system to assess clinical nursing process quality, leveraging a mobile nursing information system to enhance care efficiency and safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Delphi method was employed, with indicator weights assigned via a precedence ordering chart. Data from three distinct clinical departments were analyzed to test the system, focusing on 20 indicators spanning assessment, execution, guidance, and management domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both rounds of expert consultation achieved 100% response rates, with high authority coefficients (0.89 and 0.90). Kendall's concordance coefficients indicated moderate agreement among experts (W = 0.21, P < 0.05; W = 0.129, P < 0.05). The mean importance scores for each indicator ranged from 3.85 to 5.00, with coefficients of variation ranging from 0.00 to 0.24. The final system included 4 primary indicators (assessment [weight: 0.438], execution [0.313], guidance [0.125], management [0.125]) and 44 secondary indicators. Significant variations emerged across departments. One department demonstrated significantly lower execution rates for subcutaneous, intradermal, intramuscular, and intravenous injections, nebulization inhalation, oral medication, and intravenous infusion compared to the other two departments (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Similarly, another department exhibited a significantly lower rate of timely submission of blood, urine, stool, and sputum specimens compared to the other departments (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The indicator system developed for evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes within a mobile nursing information system demonstrated scientific reliability and validity, with appropriately assigned indicator weights. This system shows promise as a potentially effective means of evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes. Future research could build on the results of this study to further validate the timeliness and objectivity of this indicator system in assessing the quality of the nursing process.</p>","PeriodicalId":16357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","volume":"18 ","pages":"2225-2236"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12025824/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and Validation of an Indicator System for Evaluating Clinical Nursing Process Quality Using Mobile Nursing Information Systems.\",\"authors\":\"Hongyue Ge, Qiao Wang, Sibo Liu, Yanbin Tian, Jie Ma\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JMDH.S512781\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop and validate a standardized indicator system to assess clinical nursing process quality, leveraging a mobile nursing information system to enhance care efficiency and safety.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Delphi method was employed, with indicator weights assigned via a precedence ordering chart. Data from three distinct clinical departments were analyzed to test the system, focusing on 20 indicators spanning assessment, execution, guidance, and management domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both rounds of expert consultation achieved 100% response rates, with high authority coefficients (0.89 and 0.90). Kendall's concordance coefficients indicated moderate agreement among experts (W = 0.21, P < 0.05; W = 0.129, P < 0.05). The mean importance scores for each indicator ranged from 3.85 to 5.00, with coefficients of variation ranging from 0.00 to 0.24. The final system included 4 primary indicators (assessment [weight: 0.438], execution [0.313], guidance [0.125], management [0.125]) and 44 secondary indicators. Significant variations emerged across departments. One department demonstrated significantly lower execution rates for subcutaneous, intradermal, intramuscular, and intravenous injections, nebulization inhalation, oral medication, and intravenous infusion compared to the other two departments (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Similarly, another department exhibited a significantly lower rate of timely submission of blood, urine, stool, and sputum specimens compared to the other departments (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The indicator system developed for evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes within a mobile nursing information system demonstrated scientific reliability and validity, with appropriately assigned indicator weights. This system shows promise as a potentially effective means of evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes. Future research could build on the results of this study to further validate the timeliness and objectivity of this indicator system in assessing the quality of the nursing process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"2225-2236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12025824/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S512781\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S512781","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：本研究旨在建立并验证一套标准化的临床护理过程质量评价指标体系，利用移动护理信息系统提高护理效率和安全性。方法：采用德尔菲法，通过优先排序图确定指标权重。我们分析了来自三个不同临床科室的数据，对该系统进行了测试，重点关注了涵盖评估、执行、指导和管理领域的20个指标。结果：两轮专家咨询满意率均达到100%，权威系数较高（分别为0.89和0.90）。肯德尔一致性系数显示专家间的一致程度中等(W = 0.21, P < 0.05；W = 0.129, p < 0.05)。各指标的平均重要性评分范围为3.85 ~ 5.00，变异系数范围为0.00 ~ 0.24。最终体系包括4个一级指标（评价[权重：0.438]、执行[权重：0.313]、指导[权重：0.125]、管理[权重：0.125]）和44个二级指标。各部门之间出现了显著差异。其中一个科室的皮下、皮内、肌内、静脉注射、雾化吸入、口服药物、静脉输液的执行率明显低于其他两个科室（P < 0.05）。同样，其他科室及时提交血、尿、便、痰标本的比例也明显低于其他科室（P < 0.05）。结论：构建的移动护理信息系统临床护理流程质量评价指标体系具有科学的信度和效度，指标权重分配合理。该系统显示了作为评估临床护理过程质量的潜在有效手段的前景。未来的研究可在本研究结果的基础上进一步验证该指标体系在评估护理过程质量方面的及时性和客观性。
Development and Validation of an Indicator System for Evaluating Clinical Nursing Process Quality Using Mobile Nursing Information Systems.
Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a standardized indicator system to assess clinical nursing process quality, leveraging a mobile nursing information system to enhance care efficiency and safety.
Methods: A Delphi method was employed, with indicator weights assigned via a precedence ordering chart. Data from three distinct clinical departments were analyzed to test the system, focusing on 20 indicators spanning assessment, execution, guidance, and management domains.
Results: Both rounds of expert consultation achieved 100% response rates, with high authority coefficients (0.89 and 0.90). Kendall's concordance coefficients indicated moderate agreement among experts (W = 0.21, P < 0.05; W = 0.129, P < 0.05). The mean importance scores for each indicator ranged from 3.85 to 5.00, with coefficients of variation ranging from 0.00 to 0.24. The final system included 4 primary indicators (assessment [weight: 0.438], execution [0.313], guidance [0.125], management [0.125]) and 44 secondary indicators. Significant variations emerged across departments. One department demonstrated significantly lower execution rates for subcutaneous, intradermal, intramuscular, and intravenous injections, nebulization inhalation, oral medication, and intravenous infusion compared to the other two departments (P < 0.05). Similarly, another department exhibited a significantly lower rate of timely submission of blood, urine, stool, and sputum specimens compared to the other departments (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: The indicator system developed for evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes within a mobile nursing information system demonstrated scientific reliability and validity, with appropriately assigned indicator weights. This system shows promise as a potentially effective means of evaluating the quality of clinical nursing processes. Future research could build on the results of this study to further validate the timeliness and objectivity of this indicator system in assessing the quality of the nursing process.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare (JMDH) aims to represent and publish research in healthcare areas delivered by practitioners of different disciplines. This includes studies and reviews conducted by multidisciplinary teams as well as research which evaluates or reports the results or conduct of such teams or healthcare processes in general. The journal covers a very wide range of areas and we welcome submissions from practitioners at all levels and from all over the world. Good healthcare is not bounded by person, place or time and the journal aims to reflect this. The JMDH is published as an open-access journal to allow this wide range of practical, patient relevant research to be immediately available to practitioners who can access and use it immediately upon publication.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
