格拉斯哥昏迷量表在急诊护士中的应用:一项多中心横断面研究。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Cairong Liu, Zhi Da, Tingting Qi, Xueli Ji, Feng Chen, Yangchun Zhang
{"title":"格拉斯哥昏迷量表在急诊护士中的应用:一项多中心横断面研究。","authors":"Cairong Liu, Zhi Da, Tingting Qi, Xueli Ji, Feng Chen, Yangchun Zhang","doi":"10.1111/jocn.70124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To analyse current Glasgow Coma Scale practice among emergency nurses in China and identify factors influencing assessment quality.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A quantitative, multicenter cross-sectional design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 1740 emergency nurses from secondary and tertiary hospitals across 21 provinces completed a validated structured questionnaire between March and April 2025. Participants had at least 6 months of emergency nursing experience. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multiple logistic regression to examine factors influencing correct Glasgow Coma Scale application.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants had a mean age of 29.8 years (SD = 6.2). Only 52.5% of nurses demonstrated correct Glasgow Coma Scale application despite 97.0% having theoretical knowledge of scoring criteria. While 56.8% had received Glasgow Coma Scale training, significant standardisation deficiencies emerged. Notably, 41.8% of departments lacked operational guidelines, and 53.7% of nurses experienced scoring disagreements with colleagues. Clinical utilisation varied substantially by patient population: traumatic brain injury (97.8%), neurological diseases (96.9%), and systemic critical illness (85.8%). Multivariate analysis identified six significant factors influencing correct application: standardised training (OR = 2.252, 95% CI: 1.789-2.825), manageable workload ≤ 4 patients/shift (OR = 1.652, 95% CI: 1.327-2.057), departmental guidelines (OR = 1.523, 95% CI: 1.233-1.881), extensive work experience ≥ 9 years (OR = 1.534, 95% CI: 1.182-1.992), while multidisciplinary collaboration issues (OR = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.439-0.712) and special patient experience (OR = 0.520, 95% CI: 0.406-0.666) were associated with reduced accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial standardisation challenges exist in Glasgow Coma Scale practice among Chinese emergency nurses, characterised by significant gaps between theoretical knowledge and clinical application. Major barriers include insufficient standardised guidelines, inconsistent training approaches, and inadequate interdisciplinary collaboration.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>Healthcare administrators should develop national standardised guidelines, implement simulation-based training programs, optimise emergency workflows, and integrate alternative assessment tools to enhance consciousness assessment accuracy and improve patient safety.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>STROBE statement adherence.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No patient or public contribution.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Glasgow Coma Scale Practice Among Emergency Nurses in China: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Cairong Liu, Zhi Da, Tingting Qi, Xueli Ji, Feng Chen, Yangchun Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jocn.70124\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To analyse current Glasgow Coma Scale practice among emergency nurses in China and identify factors influencing assessment quality.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A quantitative, multicenter cross-sectional design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 1740 emergency nurses from secondary and tertiary hospitals across 21 provinces completed a validated structured questionnaire between March and April 2025. Participants had at least 6 months of emergency nursing experience. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multiple logistic regression to examine factors influencing correct Glasgow Coma Scale application.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants had a mean age of 29.8 years (SD = 6.2). Only 52.5% of nurses demonstrated correct Glasgow Coma Scale application despite 97.0% having theoretical knowledge of scoring criteria. While 56.8% had received Glasgow Coma Scale training, significant standardisation deficiencies emerged. Notably, 41.8% of departments lacked operational guidelines, and 53.7% of nurses experienced scoring disagreements with colleagues. Clinical utilisation varied substantially by patient population: traumatic brain injury (97.8%), neurological diseases (96.9%), and systemic critical illness (85.8%). Multivariate analysis identified six significant factors influencing correct application: standardised training (OR = 2.252, 95% CI: 1.789-2.825), manageable workload ≤ 4 patients/shift (OR = 1.652, 95% CI: 1.327-2.057), departmental guidelines (OR = 1.523, 95% CI: 1.233-1.881), extensive work experience ≥ 9 years (OR = 1.534, 95% CI: 1.182-1.992), while multidisciplinary collaboration issues (OR = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.439-0.712) and special patient experience (OR = 0.520, 95% CI: 0.406-0.666) were associated with reduced accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Substantial standardisation challenges exist in Glasgow Coma Scale practice among Chinese emergency nurses, characterised by significant gaps between theoretical knowledge and clinical application. Major barriers include insufficient standardised guidelines, inconsistent training approaches, and inadequate interdisciplinary collaboration.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>Healthcare administrators should develop national standardised guidelines, implement simulation-based training programs, optimise emergency workflows, and integrate alternative assessment tools to enhance consciousness assessment accuracy and improve patient safety.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>STROBE statement adherence.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No patient or public contribution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-30\",\"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.70124\",\"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.70124","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:分析目前急诊护士格拉斯哥昏迷量表的实施情况,找出影响评估质量的因素。设计:定量的、多中心的横断面设计。方法:选取21个省份二、三级医院急诊护士1740名,于2025年3 - 4月完成一份经验证的结构化问卷。参与者至少有6个月的急救护理经验。数据分析包括描述性统计、卡方检验和多元逻辑回归,以检验影响格拉斯哥昏迷量表正确应用的因素。结果:参与者的平均年龄为29.8岁(SD = 6.2)。尽管97.0%的护士具有评分标准的理论知识,但只有52.5%的护士能够正确应用格拉斯哥昏迷量表。虽然56.8%的人接受过格拉斯哥昏迷量表培训,但出现了明显的标准化缺陷。值得注意的是,41.8%的科室缺乏操作指南,53.7%的护士与同事在评分方面存在分歧。临床应用因患者人群而异:颅脑外伤(97.8%)、神经系统疾病(96.9%)和全身性危重疾病(85.8%)。多因素分析确定了影响正确应用的六个显著因素:标准化培训(OR = 2.252, 95% CI: 1.789-2.825)、可管理的工作量≤4例/班(OR = 1.652, 95% CI: 1.327-2.057)、部门指南(OR = 1.523, 95% CI: 1.233-1.881)、丰富的工作经验≥9年(OR = 1.534, 95% CI: 1.182-1.992),而多学科合作问题(OR = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.439-0.712)和特殊患者经验(OR = 0.520, 95% CI:0.406-0.666)与准确性降低相关。结论:我国急诊护士在格拉斯哥昏迷量表实践中存在着大量的标准化挑战,其特点是理论知识与临床应用之间存在显著差距。主要障碍包括缺乏标准化的指导方针、不一致的培训方法和不充分的跨学科合作。影响:医疗保健管理人员应制定国家标准化指南,实施基于模拟的培训计划,优化应急工作流程,并集成替代评估工具,以提高意识评估的准确性并改善患者安全。报告方法:STROBE语句依从性。患者或公众捐款:没有患者或公众捐款。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Glasgow Coma Scale Practice Among Emergency Nurses in China: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.

Aim: To analyse current Glasgow Coma Scale practice among emergency nurses in China and identify factors influencing assessment quality.

Design: A quantitative, multicenter cross-sectional design.

Methods: A convenience sample of 1740 emergency nurses from secondary and tertiary hospitals across 21 provinces completed a validated structured questionnaire between March and April 2025. Participants had at least 6 months of emergency nursing experience. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multiple logistic regression to examine factors influencing correct Glasgow Coma Scale application.

Results: Participants had a mean age of 29.8 years (SD = 6.2). Only 52.5% of nurses demonstrated correct Glasgow Coma Scale application despite 97.0% having theoretical knowledge of scoring criteria. While 56.8% had received Glasgow Coma Scale training, significant standardisation deficiencies emerged. Notably, 41.8% of departments lacked operational guidelines, and 53.7% of nurses experienced scoring disagreements with colleagues. Clinical utilisation varied substantially by patient population: traumatic brain injury (97.8%), neurological diseases (96.9%), and systemic critical illness (85.8%). Multivariate analysis identified six significant factors influencing correct application: standardised training (OR = 2.252, 95% CI: 1.789-2.825), manageable workload ≤ 4 patients/shift (OR = 1.652, 95% CI: 1.327-2.057), departmental guidelines (OR = 1.523, 95% CI: 1.233-1.881), extensive work experience ≥ 9 years (OR = 1.534, 95% CI: 1.182-1.992), while multidisciplinary collaboration issues (OR = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.439-0.712) and special patient experience (OR = 0.520, 95% CI: 0.406-0.666) were associated with reduced accuracy.

Conclusion: Substantial standardisation challenges exist in Glasgow Coma Scale practice among Chinese emergency nurses, characterised by significant gaps between theoretical knowledge and clinical application. Major barriers include insufficient standardised guidelines, inconsistent training approaches, and inadequate interdisciplinary collaboration.

Impact: Healthcare administrators should develop national standardised guidelines, implement simulation-based training programs, optimise emergency workflows, and integrate alternative assessment tools to enhance consciousness assessment accuracy and improve patient safety.

Reporting method: STROBE statement adherence.

Patient or public contribution: No patient or public contribution.

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