肿瘤患者压力损伤评估工具:系统综述。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Wei Zou, Juan Liu, Xinxiang Du, Hui Yang
{"title":"肿瘤患者压力损伤评估工具:系统综述。","authors":"Wei Zou, Juan Liu, Xinxiang Du, Hui Yang","doi":"10.1111/jocn.70053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the measurement properties of pressure injury risk assessment tools for cancer patients using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to serve as a reference for clinical nurses in their hospital duties when choosing high-quality assessment tools.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The English literature in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and the search period ranged from the inception of the database to September 30, 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Two tools-the PUSO (Pressure Ulcer Scale in Oncology) and the Cuire scale-demonstrated sufficient evidence of content validity and structural validity, meeting the COSMIN quality standards. None of the studies reported the cross-cultural validity, stability, and measurement error of the assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following the COSMIN assessment, the PUSO and the Cuire were developed using rigorous procedures, ensuring sufficient overall quality for content validity, structural validity, and other measurement properties. We recommend their use across various environments, based on the quantity and content of specific items. The PUSO was recommended for clinical screening, whereas the Cuire scale was deemed more suitable for use in outpatient, community, and scientific research settings. However, these measurement properties are not without flaws, and their clinical application requires further validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pressure Injury Assessment Tools for Oncology Patients: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Wei Zou, Juan Liu, Xinxiang Du, Hui Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jocn.70053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the measurement properties of pressure injury risk assessment tools for cancer patients using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to serve as a reference for clinical nurses in their hospital duties when choosing high-quality assessment tools.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The English literature in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and the search period ranged from the inception of the database to September 30, 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Two tools-the PUSO (Pressure Ulcer Scale in Oncology) and the Cuire scale-demonstrated sufficient evidence of content validity and structural validity, meeting the COSMIN quality standards. None of the studies reported the cross-cultural validity, stability, and measurement error of the assessment tool.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following the COSMIN assessment, the PUSO and the Cuire were developed using rigorous procedures, ensuring sufficient overall quality for content validity, structural validity, and other measurement properties. We recommend their use across various environments, based on the quantity and content of specific items. The PUSO was recommended for clinical screening, whereas the Cuire scale was deemed more suitable for use in outpatient, community, and scientific research settings. However, these measurement properties are not without flaws, and their clinical application requires further validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-03\",\"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.70053\",\"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.70053","RegionNum":3,"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

目的:采用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)方法,评价肿瘤患者压力损伤风险评估工具的测量特性,为临床护士在医院工作中选择高质量的评估工具提供参考。设计:基于COSMIN方法的系统评价。数据来源:PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、CINAHL英文文献,检索时间从建库到2024年9月30日。方法:两名审稿人独立筛选研究,提取数据,并评估纳入研究的方法学质量和测量特性。结果:7项研究符合纳入标准。PUSO(肿瘤压疮量表)和Cuire量表具有足够的内容效度和结构效度证据,符合COSMIN质量标准。没有研究报告评估工具的跨文化有效性、稳定性和测量误差。结论:在COSMIN评估后,PUSO和Cuire采用严格的程序开发,确保了内容效度、结构效度和其他测量特性的充分整体质量。我们建议根据具体项目的数量和内容,在各种环境中使用它们。PUSO被推荐用于临床筛查,而curire量表被认为更适合用于门诊、社区和科研环境。然而,这些测量特性并非没有缺陷,其临床应用需要进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pressure Injury Assessment Tools for Oncology Patients: A Systematic Review.

Aim: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the measurement properties of pressure injury risk assessment tools for cancer patients using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to serve as a reference for clinical nurses in their hospital duties when choosing high-quality assessment tools.

Design: A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.

Data sources: The English literature in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and the search period ranged from the inception of the database to September 30, 2024.

Methods: Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included studies.

Results: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Two tools-the PUSO (Pressure Ulcer Scale in Oncology) and the Cuire scale-demonstrated sufficient evidence of content validity and structural validity, meeting the COSMIN quality standards. None of the studies reported the cross-cultural validity, stability, and measurement error of the assessment tool.

Conclusion: Following the COSMIN assessment, the PUSO and the Cuire were developed using rigorous procedures, ensuring sufficient overall quality for content validity, structural validity, and other measurement properties. We recommend their use across various environments, based on the quantity and content of specific items. The PUSO was recommended for clinical screening, whereas the Cuire scale was deemed more suitable for use in outpatient, community, and scientific research settings. However, these measurement properties are not without flaws, and their clinical application requires further validation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信