A study on nursing workload measurement based on relative value

Yuchi Shen, Qiufen Zhu, W. Jian
{"title":"A study on nursing workload measurement based on relative value","authors":"Yuchi Shen, Qiufen Zhu, W. Jian","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1000-6672.2019.09.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo test the applicability of the relative value used to measure Chinese nurses′ workload, and measure part of single workload of nursing procedures. \n \n \nMethods \nTime, physical effort, mental effort and medical risk were used as the four dimensions to evaluate nurses′ workload. Based on these dimensions, a set of questionnaires covering 117 common nursing procedures were designed and 58 nurses form 58 hospitals were surveyed. Establishing three different regulation modals, of which the applicability and stability were evaluated through the good of fit. \n \n \nResults \nMedian of the relative value of different dimensions was used to indicate the average level of the various nursing procedures′ workload. The results showed that the median of relative value between 100 to 199 accounted for the largest share, up to 88.89% of 104 items. The median of relative value between 200 to 299 accounted for 7.69%(9 items). The median of relative value between 0 to 99(3 items)and more than 300(1 item)accounted for a small proportion. The lowest point of workload was blood pressure measuring, having a relative value of 90(70, 100) while the PICC catheterization accounted for the highest point of workload, being 370(200, 500) Three kinds of modals were valid(Model Ⅰ, F=10 626.16, P<0.001; Model Ⅱ, F=17 108.22, P<0.001; Model Ⅲ: F=6 694.16, P<0.001), while the good of fit of these regulation modals was between 0.8 to 0.9. Time, physical effort, mental effort and iatrogenic risk were the key variables of nurses′ workload. \n \n \nConclusions \nThe applicability of the relative value to measure nurses′ workload is fairly satisfactory, and the relative value points based on multi-dimension will enjoy a promising future. \n \n \nKey words: \nNursing care; Workload; Measurement; Relative value; Questionnaire survey","PeriodicalId":56974,"journal":{"name":"中华医院管理杂志","volume":"35 1","pages":"761-765"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华医院管理杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1000-6672.2019.09.012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To test the applicability of the relative value used to measure Chinese nurses′ workload, and measure part of single workload of nursing procedures. Methods Time, physical effort, mental effort and medical risk were used as the four dimensions to evaluate nurses′ workload. Based on these dimensions, a set of questionnaires covering 117 common nursing procedures were designed and 58 nurses form 58 hospitals were surveyed. Establishing three different regulation modals, of which the applicability and stability were evaluated through the good of fit. Results Median of the relative value of different dimensions was used to indicate the average level of the various nursing procedures′ workload. The results showed that the median of relative value between 100 to 199 accounted for the largest share, up to 88.89% of 104 items. The median of relative value between 200 to 299 accounted for 7.69%(9 items). The median of relative value between 0 to 99(3 items)and more than 300(1 item)accounted for a small proportion. The lowest point of workload was blood pressure measuring, having a relative value of 90(70, 100) while the PICC catheterization accounted for the highest point of workload, being 370(200, 500) Three kinds of modals were valid(Model Ⅰ, F=10 626.16, P<0.001; Model Ⅱ, F=17 108.22, P<0.001; Model Ⅲ: F=6 694.16, P<0.001), while the good of fit of these regulation modals was between 0.8 to 0.9. Time, physical effort, mental effort and iatrogenic risk were the key variables of nurses′ workload. Conclusions The applicability of the relative value to measure nurses′ workload is fairly satisfactory, and the relative value points based on multi-dimension will enjoy a promising future. Key words: Nursing care; Workload; Measurement; Relative value; Questionnaire survey
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
基于相对值的护理工作量计量研究
目的检验相对值法测量中国护士工作量的适用性,并对护理程序中单次工作量的一部分进行测量。方法采用时间、体力、脑力和医疗风险四个维度对护士工作量进行评价。基于这些维度,设计了一套涵盖117种常见护理程序的问卷,并对58家医院的58名护士进行了调查。建立了三种不同的调节模式,并通过拟合度对其适用性和稳定性进行了评价。结果采用不同维度相对值的中位数表示不同护理程序工作量的平均水平。结果显示,相对值在100至199之间的中位数所占比例最大,在104个项目中高达88.89%。相对值在200至299之间的中位数占7.69%(9项)。相对值在0至99(3个项目)和300以上(1个项目)之间的中位数所占比例较小。血压测量是工作负荷的最低点,相对值为90(70100),PICC导管插入术占工作负荷的最高点,为370(200500)。三种模式有效(模型Ⅰ,F=10626.16,P<0.001;模型Ⅱ,F=17108.22,P<0.001,模型Ⅲ:F=6694.16,P<0.001),而这些调节模式的良好拟合度在0.8-0.9之间。时间、体力、脑力和医源性风险是护士工作量的关键变量。结论相对值测量护士工作量的适用性较好,基于多维度的相对值点具有良好的应用前景。关键词:护理;工作量;测量;相对值;问卷调查
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9658
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Management practice for critical COVID-19 patients rescue in designated hospitals Exploration and practice: operation mode of a united medical team cooperation in designated hospitals for treating severe COVID-19 patients Pharmaceutical administration practice during prevention and treatment of COVID-19 The thinking on improving the construction of the national treatment system for major infectious diseases and the emergency response mechanism Characteristics and practice management of intensive care for patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019
×
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