Mapping and Characterizing Instruments for Assessing Family Nurses' Workload: Scoping Review.

IF 2.4 Q1 NURSING Nursing Reports Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.3390/nursrep14030151
António Dias, Beatriz Araújo, Élvio Jesus
{"title":"Mapping and Characterizing Instruments for Assessing Family Nurses' Workload: Scoping Review.","authors":"António Dias, Beatriz Araújo, Élvio Jesus","doi":"10.3390/nursrep14030151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The importance of knowing the workload of family nurses lies essentially in the possibility of improving health outcomes, care processes and the nurse's professional life. There is a lack of studies that fully describe the nursing workload in primary care, particularly, in the context of family health nursing, and the ideal metrics to be used remain unknown, making it impossible to characterize and therefore provide the necessary insight to acknowledge the different contributions of several aspects that embody the global workload of family nurses. The objective of this scoping review was to map the known evidence and characterize the instruments used to assess the workload of family nurses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Scoping review, according to the Joanna Briggs Institute, proposed a methodology for scoping reviews, consisting of three research stages: (1) an initial research in Medline and CINHAL; (2) an extended search, using keywords and search terms, in the following databases: JBI, CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Scopus; and (3) a search of the reference lists of the selected articles. No time limit was defined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies referring to ten assessment instruments were included. Nine of them analyze workload as a dimension of a broader instrument, and two studies refer to an instrument that focuses exclusively on workload.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The diversity of professional competencies and contexts, the conceptual complexity of workload and the absence of a theoretical framework make it difficult to identify consensual instruments to assess the workload of family nurses. This study was prospectively registered with the Open Science Framework<sup>®</sup> on 6 September 2023, with the registration number: 3k6vr.</p>","PeriodicalId":40753,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11348170/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14030151","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

Abstract

Background: The importance of knowing the workload of family nurses lies essentially in the possibility of improving health outcomes, care processes and the nurse's professional life. There is a lack of studies that fully describe the nursing workload in primary care, particularly, in the context of family health nursing, and the ideal metrics to be used remain unknown, making it impossible to characterize and therefore provide the necessary insight to acknowledge the different contributions of several aspects that embody the global workload of family nurses. The objective of this scoping review was to map the known evidence and characterize the instruments used to assess the workload of family nurses.

Methods: Scoping review, according to the Joanna Briggs Institute, proposed a methodology for scoping reviews, consisting of three research stages: (1) an initial research in Medline and CINHAL; (2) an extended search, using keywords and search terms, in the following databases: JBI, CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Scopus; and (3) a search of the reference lists of the selected articles. No time limit was defined.

Results: Fourteen studies referring to ten assessment instruments were included. Nine of them analyze workload as a dimension of a broader instrument, and two studies refer to an instrument that focuses exclusively on workload.

Conclusions: The diversity of professional competencies and contexts, the conceptual complexity of workload and the absence of a theoretical framework make it difficult to identify consensual instruments to assess the workload of family nurses. This study was prospectively registered with the Open Science Framework® on 6 September 2023, with the registration number: 3k6vr.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭护士工作量评估工具的绘图和特征描述:范围审查。
背景:了解家庭护士工作量的重要性主要在于能否改善健康结果、护理过程和护士的职业生活。目前还缺乏全面描述初级护理,特别是家庭健康护理中护理工作量的研究,而且所使用的理想衡量标准仍然未知,因此无法描述其特征,也就无法提供必要的洞察力,以确认体现家庭护士总体工作量的几个方面的不同贡献。本次范围综述的目的是对已知证据进行梳理,并对用于评估家庭护士工作量的工具进行定性:根据乔安娜-布里格斯研究所(Joanna Briggs Institute)提出的范围界定综述方法,范围界定综述包括三个研究阶段:(1) 在 Medline 和 CINHAL 中进行初步研究;(2) 使用关键词和搜索条件在以下数据库中进行扩展搜索:JBI、CINAHL Complete、MEDLINE、Cochrane 和 Scopus;(3) 对所选文章的参考文献目录进行检索。结果:结果:共纳入 14 项研究,涉及 10 种评估工具。其中九项研究将工作量作为一种更广泛的评估工具的一个维度进行分析,两项研究涉及一种专门针对工作量的评估工具:由于专业能力和环境的多样性、工作量概念的复杂性以及理论框架的缺失,很难找到一致认可的工具来评估家庭护士的工作量。本研究于 2023 年 9 月 6 日在开放科学框架(Open Science Framework®)进行了前瞻性注册,注册号为:3k6vr。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Reports
Nursing Reports NURSING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
78
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.
期刊最新文献
Functional Capacity of Institutionalized Older People and Their Quality of Life, Depressive Symptoms and Feelings of Loneliness: A Cross-Sectional Study. Knowing, Being and Becoming a Person-Centred Nurse Leader: Findings from a Transformative Professional Development Programme. Nursing Interventions Related to the Need for Oxygenation in Severe COVID-19 Disease in Hospitalized Adults: A Retrospective Study. Child-Centered Care: A Qualitative Study Exploring Pediatric Hospitalization Through Children's Perspectives. An Analysis Through to Congruence Between Real and Self-Perceived Body Mass Index in Nursing Students.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1