基于Donabedian模型的骨科压力损伤护理质量评价指标体系的建立:德尔菲研究。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Liqiong Zhou, Yinfeng Hu, Pingping Shuai
{"title":"基于Donabedian模型的骨科压力损伤护理质量评价指标体系的建立:德尔菲研究。","authors":"Liqiong Zhou, Yinfeng Hu, Pingping Shuai","doi":"10.1186/s12912-025-03823-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to develop and validate a scientific and reliable set of nursing quality assessment indicators for orthopedic patients with pressure injuries based on the Donabedian model. The Delphi method was adopted for the selection and establishment of the indicators.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Delphi method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed an evaluation index system using a literature review and semi-structured interviews. Two rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted with 25 international experts to gather insights on indicators for orthopedic pressure injury care quality. The analytic hierarchy process was used to determine indicator weights. Consensus was defined as an average score of at least 3.5 and agreement from 75% of participants. Based on these criteria, we finalized the evaluation framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final evaluation index system for nursing quality in orthopedic pressure injury management comprises 3 first-level indicators-structural quality, process quality, and outcome quality-along with 9 second-level and 26 third-level indicators. Both rounds of expert consultation achieved a 100% effective response rate. The expert authority coefficients were 0.890 for the first round and 0.934 for the second round. In the second consultation round, Kendall's concordance coefficients for the first, second, and third-level indicators were 0.186, 0.217, and 0.115, respectively (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries developed in this study is scientifically valid and applicable to clinical practice. It provides a standardized reference for assessing nursing quality in managing orthopedic pressure injuries.</p><p><strong>Implications for the profession and patient care: </strong>The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries, based on the Donabedian model, offers a structured framework for monitoring nursing quality. It standardizes nursing processes and improves resource allocation efficiency. Through outcome-based feedback, the system promotes continuous quality improvement, enhances service standardization, increases patient safety, and completes the quality management cycle.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This study was reported by the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi Studies (CREDES) guidance.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No Patient or Public Contribution.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":48580,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nursing","volume":"24 1","pages":"1183"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465155/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of nursing quality evaluation indicators system for pressure injury in orthopedics based on the Donabedian model: a Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Liqiong Zhou, Yinfeng Hu, Pingping Shuai\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12912-025-03823-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to develop and validate a scientific and reliable set of nursing quality assessment indicators for orthopedic patients with pressure injuries based on the Donabedian model. The Delphi method was adopted for the selection and establishment of the indicators.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Delphi method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed an evaluation index system using a literature review and semi-structured interviews. Two rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted with 25 international experts to gather insights on indicators for orthopedic pressure injury care quality. The analytic hierarchy process was used to determine indicator weights. Consensus was defined as an average score of at least 3.5 and agreement from 75% of participants. Based on these criteria, we finalized the evaluation framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final evaluation index system for nursing quality in orthopedic pressure injury management comprises 3 first-level indicators-structural quality, process quality, and outcome quality-along with 9 second-level and 26 third-level indicators. Both rounds of expert consultation achieved a 100% effective response rate. The expert authority coefficients were 0.890 for the first round and 0.934 for the second round. In the second consultation round, Kendall's concordance coefficients for the first, second, and third-level indicators were 0.186, 0.217, and 0.115, respectively (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries developed in this study is scientifically valid and applicable to clinical practice. It provides a standardized reference for assessing nursing quality in managing orthopedic pressure injuries.</p><p><strong>Implications for the profession and patient care: </strong>The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries, based on the Donabedian model, offers a structured framework for monitoring nursing quality. It standardizes nursing processes and improves resource allocation efficiency. Through outcome-based feedback, the system promotes continuous quality improvement, enhances service standardization, increases patient safety, and completes the quality management cycle.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>This study was reported by the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi Studies (CREDES) guidance.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No Patient or Public Contribution.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Nursing\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"1183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465155/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03823-1\",\"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/s12912-025-03823-1","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

目的:本研究旨在基于Donabedian模型,建立并验证一套科学可靠的骨科压力性损伤患者护理质量评价指标。采用德尔菲法对指标进行选择和建立。设计:德尔菲法。方法:采用文献回顾法和半结构化访谈法建立评价指标体系。对25位国际专家进行了两轮德尔菲调查,以收集骨科压力损伤护理质量指标的见解。采用层次分析法确定指标权重。共识被定义为平均得分至少为3.5分,并且75%的参与者同意。基于这些标准,我们最终确定了评估框架。结果:最终得出的骨科压力损伤管理护理质量评价指标体系包括结构质量、过程质量和结果质量3个一级指标,9个二级指标和26个三级指标。两轮专家咨询的有效回复率均达到100%。专家权威系数第一轮为0.890,第二轮为0.934。第二轮会诊时,一、二、三级指标的肯德尔一致性系数分别为0.186、0.217、0.115 (P)。结论:本研究建立的骨科压力性损伤护理质量评价指标体系科学有效,可应用于临床。为骨科压力性损伤护理质量评价提供了规范化参考。对专业和患者护理的启示:基于Donabedian模型的骨科压力损伤护理质量评价指标体系,为监测护理质量提供了一个结构化的框架。规范护理流程,提高资源配置效率。该系统通过基于结果的反馈,促进了质量的持续改进,提高了服务的标准化,提高了患者的安全性,完成了质量管理周期。报告方法:本研究根据德尔菲研究的指导和报告(CREDES)报告。患者或公众捐赠:无患者或公众捐赠。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of nursing quality evaluation indicators system for pressure injury in orthopedics based on the Donabedian model: a Delphi study.

Aim: This study aims to develop and validate a scientific and reliable set of nursing quality assessment indicators for orthopedic patients with pressure injuries based on the Donabedian model. The Delphi method was adopted for the selection and establishment of the indicators.

Design: Delphi method.

Methods: We developed an evaluation index system using a literature review and semi-structured interviews. Two rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted with 25 international experts to gather insights on indicators for orthopedic pressure injury care quality. The analytic hierarchy process was used to determine indicator weights. Consensus was defined as an average score of at least 3.5 and agreement from 75% of participants. Based on these criteria, we finalized the evaluation framework.

Results: The final evaluation index system for nursing quality in orthopedic pressure injury management comprises 3 first-level indicators-structural quality, process quality, and outcome quality-along with 9 second-level and 26 third-level indicators. Both rounds of expert consultation achieved a 100% effective response rate. The expert authority coefficients were 0.890 for the first round and 0.934 for the second round. In the second consultation round, Kendall's concordance coefficients for the first, second, and third-level indicators were 0.186, 0.217, and 0.115, respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries developed in this study is scientifically valid and applicable to clinical practice. It provides a standardized reference for assessing nursing quality in managing orthopedic pressure injuries.

Implications for the profession and patient care: The nursing quality evaluation index system for orthopedic pressure injuries, based on the Donabedian model, offers a structured framework for monitoring nursing quality. It standardizes nursing processes and improves resource allocation efficiency. Through outcome-based feedback, the system promotes continuous quality improvement, enhances service standardization, increases patient safety, and completes the quality management cycle.

Reporting method: This study was reported by the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi Studies (CREDES) guidance.

Patient or public contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

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
BMC Nursing
BMC Nursing Nursing-General Nursing
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
317
审稿时长
30 weeks
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.
×
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