Magnet®识别与患者预后之间的关系:范围界定综述。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Journal of Nursing Administration Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-11 DOI:10.1097/NNA.0000000000001325
Linda Connor, Cindy Beckett, Inga Zadvinskis, Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk, Roy Brown, Jeffery Messinger, Lynn Gallagher-Ford
{"title":"Magnet®识别与患者预后之间的关系:范围界定综述。","authors":"Linda Connor,&nbsp;Cindy Beckett,&nbsp;Inga Zadvinskis,&nbsp;Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk,&nbsp;Roy Brown,&nbsp;Jeffery Messinger,&nbsp;Lynn Gallagher-Ford","doi":"10.1097/NNA.0000000000001325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous systematic reviews have explored nurse, patient, and organizational outcomes in Magnet®-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals, yet these did not comprehensively review a wide variety of patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the findings from published research evaluating patient outcomes in Magnet-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A medical librarian conducted a systematic search for published peer-reviewed, English-language literature and a search of the reference lists for retrieved publications to identify articles addressing Magnet compared with non-Magnet hospitals related to patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four patient outcomes improved in Magnet-designated hospitals: mortality, patient satisfaction, failure to rescue, and falls. Four patient outcomes showed undesirable or mixed outcomes. Five patient outcomes had insufficient evidence regarding patient outcomes when treated at Magnet-recognized hospitals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Magnet Recognition® is associated with improvement in a distinct set of patient outcomes, but not all key outcome measures. Standardized outcomes and rigorous study designs are needed to further explore the impact of Magnet Recognition on a wide variety of patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":50108,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Association Between Magnet ® Recognition and Patient Outcomes : A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Linda Connor,&nbsp;Cindy Beckett,&nbsp;Inga Zadvinskis,&nbsp;Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk,&nbsp;Roy Brown,&nbsp;Jeffery Messinger,&nbsp;Lynn Gallagher-Ford\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/NNA.0000000000001325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous systematic reviews have explored nurse, patient, and organizational outcomes in Magnet®-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals, yet these did not comprehensively review a wide variety of patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the findings from published research evaluating patient outcomes in Magnet-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A medical librarian conducted a systematic search for published peer-reviewed, English-language literature and a search of the reference lists for retrieved publications to identify articles addressing Magnet compared with non-Magnet hospitals related to patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four patient outcomes improved in Magnet-designated hospitals: mortality, patient satisfaction, failure to rescue, and falls. Four patient outcomes showed undesirable or mixed outcomes. Five patient outcomes had insufficient evidence regarding patient outcomes when treated at Magnet-recognized hospitals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Magnet Recognition® is associated with improvement in a distinct set of patient outcomes, but not all key outcome measures. Standardized outcomes and rigorous study designs are needed to further explore the impact of Magnet Recognition on a wide variety of patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nursing Administration\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nursing Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000001325\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Administration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000001325","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:与非Magnet医院相比,先前的系统综述探讨了Magnet®认可医院的护士、患者和组织结果,但这些综述并没有全面综述各种患者结果。目的:本范围界定综述的目的是描述已发表的研究结果,该研究评估了Magnet认可的医院与非Magnet医院的患者结果。方法:一名医学馆员对已发表的同行评审的英文文献进行了系统搜索,并对检索到的出版物的参考文献列表进行了搜索,以确定与患者结果相关的Magnet医院与非Magnet医院的文章。结果:Magnet指定医院的四名患者的预后得到改善:死亡率、患者满意度、抢救失败和跌倒。四名患者的结果显示不良或混合结果。五名患者在Magnet认可的医院接受治疗时,没有足够的证据表明患者的结果。结论:Magnet Recognition®与一组不同的患者结果的改善有关,但并非所有关键的结果指标都有改善。需要标准化的结果和严格的研究设计,以进一步探索磁铁识别对各种患者结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Association Between Magnet ® Recognition and Patient Outcomes : A Scoping Review.

Background: Previous systematic reviews have explored nurse, patient, and organizational outcomes in Magnet®-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals, yet these did not comprehensively review a wide variety of patient outcomes.

Aim: The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the findings from published research evaluating patient outcomes in Magnet-recognized hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals.

Methods: A medical librarian conducted a systematic search for published peer-reviewed, English-language literature and a search of the reference lists for retrieved publications to identify articles addressing Magnet compared with non-Magnet hospitals related to patient outcomes.

Results: Four patient outcomes improved in Magnet-designated hospitals: mortality, patient satisfaction, failure to rescue, and falls. Four patient outcomes showed undesirable or mixed outcomes. Five patient outcomes had insufficient evidence regarding patient outcomes when treated at Magnet-recognized hospitals.

Conclusion: Magnet Recognition® is associated with improvement in a distinct set of patient outcomes, but not all key outcome measures. Standardized outcomes and rigorous study designs are needed to further explore the impact of Magnet Recognition on a wide variety of patient outcomes.

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
2.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​JONA™ is the authoritative source of information on developments and advances in patient care leadership. Content is geared to nurse executives, directors of nursing, and nurse managers in hospital, community health, and ambulatory care environments. Practical, innovative, and solution-oriented articles provide the tools and data needed to excel in executive practice in changing healthcare systems: leadership development; human, material, and financial resource management and relationships; systems, business, and financial strategies. All articles are peer-reviewed, selected and developed with the guidance of a distinguished group of editorial advisors.
期刊最新文献
National Incidence of Nurse Suicide and Associated Features. Exploring Reasons for Satisfaction with Job Assignments Among Travel Nurses. Institution-Wide Moral Distress Among Nurses. Measuring Professional Governance: The Swedish Version of the Verran Professional Governance Scale©. Advanced Practice Nurse-Led Research: Challenges and Approaches to Digital Health Programs' Evaluation Using Big Data.
×
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