Patrícia Correia, Rafael A Bernardes, Sílvia Caldeira
{"title":"评估护理质量的工具:范围回顾。","authors":"Patrícia Correia, Rafael A Bernardes, Sílvia Caldeira","doi":"10.3390/nursrep15090342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives.</b> Quality of nursing care (QNC) is a central concept in healthcare systems worldwide, with growing emphasis on developing reliable and contextually appropriate instruments for its assessment. Over recent decades, there has been a shift from outcome-based evaluation toward more holistic, patient-centered frameworks that consider both clinical indicators and interpersonal dimensions of care. This scoping review aimed to map the range, nature, and characteristics of self-report instruments used to assess the quality of nursing care, including their psychometric properties and contextual applications across different clinical settings. <b>Methods.</b> A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, alongside gray literature sources, following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the development, validation, adaptation, or application of QNC assessment tools in hospital or community nursing contexts, and were published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish. <b>Results.</b> Fifty-nine studies were included, spanning from 1995 to 2025. The instruments identified were predominantly structured around Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model, and many emphasized relational domains such as empathy, communication, and respect. Tools like the Good Nursing Care Scale (GNCS), the Quality of Oncology Nursing Care Scale (QONCS), and the Karen Scales demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α ranging from 0.79 to 0.95). <b>Conclusions.</b> Organizational factors, including leadership and staffing, and predictors such as burnout and work intensity, were found to influence perceived care quality. Important gaps remain regarding longitudinal use and integration of patient-reported outcome measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":40753,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Reports","volume":"15 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12472527/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instruments for Assessing Nursing Care Quality: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Patrícia Correia, Rafael A Bernardes, Sílvia Caldeira\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/nursrep15090342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives.</b> Quality of nursing care (QNC) is a central concept in healthcare systems worldwide, with growing emphasis on developing reliable and contextually appropriate instruments for its assessment. Over recent decades, there has been a shift from outcome-based evaluation toward more holistic, patient-centered frameworks that consider both clinical indicators and interpersonal dimensions of care. This scoping review aimed to map the range, nature, and characteristics of self-report instruments used to assess the quality of nursing care, including their psychometric properties and contextual applications across different clinical settings. <b>Methods.</b> A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, alongside gray literature sources, following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the development, validation, adaptation, or application of QNC assessment tools in hospital or community nursing contexts, and were published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish. <b>Results.</b> Fifty-nine studies were included, spanning from 1995 to 2025. The instruments identified were predominantly structured around Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model, and many emphasized relational domains such as empathy, communication, and respect. Tools like the Good Nursing Care Scale (GNCS), the Quality of Oncology Nursing Care Scale (QONCS), and the Karen Scales demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α ranging from 0.79 to 0.95). <b>Conclusions.</b> Organizational factors, including leadership and staffing, and predictors such as burnout and work intensity, were found to influence perceived care quality. Important gaps remain regarding longitudinal use and integration of patient-reported outcome measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":40753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Reports\",\"volume\":\"15 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12472527/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15090342\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15090342","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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/目标。护理质量(QNC)是全球卫生保健系统的核心概念,越来越强调开发可靠和适合环境的评估工具。近几十年来,从基于结果的评估向更全面、以患者为中心的框架转变,该框架考虑了临床指标和护理的人际维度。本综述旨在绘制用于评估护理质量的自我报告工具的范围、性质和特征,包括其心理测量特性和在不同临床环境中的情境应用。方法。系统检索CINAHL Complete、MEDLINE(通过PubMed)、Scopus、Web of Science和ProQuest Dissertations & Theses,以及灰色文献来源,遵循乔安娜布里格斯研究所(JBI)的方法和PRISMA-ScR指南。如果研究报告了QNC评估工具在医院或社区护理环境中的发展、验证、适应或应用,并且以英语、葡萄牙语或西班牙语发表,则纳入研究。结果。其中包括从1995年到2025年的59项研究。所确定的工具主要围绕Donabedian的结构-过程-结果模型构建,许多工具强调关系领域,如同理心、沟通和尊重。良好护理量表(GNCS)、肿瘤护理质量量表(QONCS)和卡伦量表等工具显示出很强的内部一致性(Cronbach's α范围为0.79至0.95)。结论。组织因素,包括领导和人员配备,以及预测因素,如倦怠和工作强度,被发现影响感知护理质量。在患者报告结果测量的纵向使用和整合方面仍然存在重要差距。
Instruments for Assessing Nursing Care Quality: A Scoping Review.
Background/Objectives. Quality of nursing care (QNC) is a central concept in healthcare systems worldwide, with growing emphasis on developing reliable and contextually appropriate instruments for its assessment. Over recent decades, there has been a shift from outcome-based evaluation toward more holistic, patient-centered frameworks that consider both clinical indicators and interpersonal dimensions of care. This scoping review aimed to map the range, nature, and characteristics of self-report instruments used to assess the quality of nursing care, including their psychometric properties and contextual applications across different clinical settings. Methods. A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, alongside gray literature sources, following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the development, validation, adaptation, or application of QNC assessment tools in hospital or community nursing contexts, and were published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish. Results. Fifty-nine studies were included, spanning from 1995 to 2025. The instruments identified were predominantly structured around Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model, and many emphasized relational domains such as empathy, communication, and respect. Tools like the Good Nursing Care Scale (GNCS), the Quality of Oncology Nursing Care Scale (QONCS), and the Karen Scales demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α ranging from 0.79 to 0.95). Conclusions. Organizational factors, including leadership and staffing, and predictors such as burnout and work intensity, were found to influence perceived care quality. Important gaps remain regarding longitudinal use and integration of patient-reported outcome measures.
期刊介绍:
Nursing Reports is an open access, peer-reviewed, online-only journal that aims to influence the art and science of nursing by making rigorously conducted research accessible and understood to the full spectrum of practicing nurses, academics, educators and interested members of the public. The journal represents an exhilarating opportunity to make a unique and significant contribution to nursing and the wider community by addressing topics, theories and issues that concern the whole field of Nursing Science, including research, practice, policy and education. The primary intent of the journal is to present scientifically sound and influential empirical and theoretical studies, critical reviews and open debates to the global community of nurses. Short reports, opinions and insight into the plight of nurses the world-over will provide a voice for those of all cultures, governments and perspectives. The emphasis of Nursing Reports will be on ensuring that the highest quality of evidence and contribution is made available to the greatest number of nurses. Nursing Reports aims to make original, evidence-based, peer-reviewed research available to the global community of nurses and to interested members of the public. In addition, reviews of the literature, open debates on professional issues and short reports from around the world are invited to contribute to our vibrant and dynamic journal. All published work will adhere to the most stringent ethical standards and journalistic principles of fairness, worth and credibility. Our journal publishes Editorials, Original Articles, Review articles, Critical Debates, Short Reports from Around the Globe and Letters to the Editor.