急诊科小儿哮喘护理质量指标;系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.9 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2214
Islam E Alkhazali, Ahmad Alrawashdeh, Mohd Hashairi Fauzi, Nik Hisamuddin Nik Ab Rahman
{"title":"急诊科小儿哮喘护理质量指标;系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Islam E Alkhazali, Ahmad Alrawashdeh, Mohd Hashairi Fauzi, Nik Hisamuddin Nik Ab Rahman","doi":"10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The quality of healthcare for pediatric asthma patients in the emergency department (ED) is of growing importance. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe existing quality indicators (QIs) designed for use in the ED for pediatric asthma care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched three main electronic databases in May 2023 for all English-language qualitative and quantitative publications that suggested or described at least one QI related to pediatric asthma care in the ED. Two reviewers independently selected the included studies and extracted data on study characteristics, all relevant QIs reported, and the rates of compliance with these indicators when available. The identified QIs were classified according to Donabedian healthcare quality framework and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) framework. When feasible, we aggregated the compliance rates for the QIs reported in observational studies using random effects models. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using various Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified twenty studies, including six expert panels, 13 observational studies, and one trial. Together, these studies presented 129 QIs for use in EDs managing pediatric asthma. Among these QIs, 66 were pinpointed by expert panel studies, whereas 63 were derived from observational studies. Within the Donabedian framework, most indicators (86.8%) concentrated on the process of care. In contrast, within the Institute of Medicine (IOM) domain, the predominant focus was on indicators related to effectiveness and safety. Observational studies reported varying compliance rates for the 36 QIs identified in the expert studies. The included studies showed a wide range of bias risks, suggesting potential methodological variances.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A significant number of QIs in pediatric asthma care have been proposed or documented in literature. Although most of these indicators prioritize the process of care, there is a conspicuous absence of outcome and structure indicators. This meta-analysis uncovered significant disparities in compliance to the identified QIs, highlighting the urgent necessity for targeted interventions to enhance pediatric asthma care in ED.</p>","PeriodicalId":8146,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"12 1","pages":"e26"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10988188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality Indicators of Pediatric Asthma Care in the Emergency Department; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Islam E Alkhazali, Ahmad Alrawashdeh, Mohd Hashairi Fauzi, Nik Hisamuddin Nik Ab Rahman\",\"doi\":\"10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The quality of healthcare for pediatric asthma patients in the emergency department (ED) is of growing importance. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe existing quality indicators (QIs) designed for use in the ED for pediatric asthma care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched three main electronic databases in May 2023 for all English-language qualitative and quantitative publications that suggested or described at least one QI related to pediatric asthma care in the ED. Two reviewers independently selected the included studies and extracted data on study characteristics, all relevant QIs reported, and the rates of compliance with these indicators when available. The identified QIs were classified according to Donabedian healthcare quality framework and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) framework. When feasible, we aggregated the compliance rates for the QIs reported in observational studies using random effects models. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using various Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified twenty studies, including six expert panels, 13 observational studies, and one trial. Together, these studies presented 129 QIs for use in EDs managing pediatric asthma. Among these QIs, 66 were pinpointed by expert panel studies, whereas 63 were derived from observational studies. Within the Donabedian framework, most indicators (86.8%) concentrated on the process of care. In contrast, within the Institute of Medicine (IOM) domain, the predominant focus was on indicators related to effectiveness and safety. Observational studies reported varying compliance rates for the 36 QIs identified in the expert studies. The included studies showed a wide range of bias risks, suggesting potential methodological variances.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A significant number of QIs in pediatric asthma care have been proposed or documented in literature. Although most of these indicators prioritize the process of care, there is a conspicuous absence of outcome and structure indicators. This meta-analysis uncovered significant disparities in compliance to the identified QIs, highlighting the urgent necessity for targeted interventions to enhance pediatric asthma care in ED.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"e26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10988188/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2214\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v12i1.2214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:急诊科(ED)中儿科哮喘患者的医疗质量越来越重要。本系统性综述旨在确定并描述现有的质量指标(QIs),这些指标旨在用于急诊科的儿科哮喘护理:我们在 2023 年 5 月对三个主要电子数据库进行了系统检索,以查找所有建议或描述了至少一种与急诊科儿科哮喘护理相关的质量指标的英文定性和定量出版物。两名审稿人独立选择了纳入的研究,并提取了有关研究特征、所有相关 QIs 报告以及这些指标的符合率(如有)的数据。已确定的 QIs 根据唐纳贝迪安医疗质量框架和医学研究所 (IOM) 框架进行了分类。在可行的情况下,我们使用随机效应模型汇总了观察性研究中报告的 QIs 达标率。我们使用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所(JBI)的各种工具对纳入研究进行了质量评估:我们确定了 20 项研究,其中包括 6 项专家小组研究、13 项观察性研究和 1 项试验。这些研究共提出了 129 项用于急诊室管理小儿哮喘的 QIs。在这些 QIs 中,66 项由专家小组研究确定,63 项来自观察性研究。在多纳比德框架内,大多数指标(86.8%)都集中在护理流程上。相比之下,在医学研究所(IOM)的领域中,主要关注的是与有效性和安全性相关的指标。观察性研究报告了专家研究中确定的 36 个质量指标的不同达标率。所纳入的研究显示了广泛的偏倚风险,表明可能存在方法上的差异:文献中提出或记录了大量儿科哮喘护理的质量指标。尽管这些指标大多优先考虑护理过程,但明显缺乏结果和结构指标。这项荟萃分析发现,在遵守已确定的质量指标方面存在显著差异,这突出表明急需采取有针对性的干预措施,以加强急诊室的儿科哮喘护理。
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
Quality Indicators of Pediatric Asthma Care in the Emergency Department; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: The quality of healthcare for pediatric asthma patients in the emergency department (ED) is of growing importance. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe existing quality indicators (QIs) designed for use in the ED for pediatric asthma care.

Methods: We systematically searched three main electronic databases in May 2023 for all English-language qualitative and quantitative publications that suggested or described at least one QI related to pediatric asthma care in the ED. Two reviewers independently selected the included studies and extracted data on study characteristics, all relevant QIs reported, and the rates of compliance with these indicators when available. The identified QIs were classified according to Donabedian healthcare quality framework and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) framework. When feasible, we aggregated the compliance rates for the QIs reported in observational studies using random effects models. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using various Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools.

Results: We identified twenty studies, including six expert panels, 13 observational studies, and one trial. Together, these studies presented 129 QIs for use in EDs managing pediatric asthma. Among these QIs, 66 were pinpointed by expert panel studies, whereas 63 were derived from observational studies. Within the Donabedian framework, most indicators (86.8%) concentrated on the process of care. In contrast, within the Institute of Medicine (IOM) domain, the predominant focus was on indicators related to effectiveness and safety. Observational studies reported varying compliance rates for the 36 QIs identified in the expert studies. The included studies showed a wide range of bias risks, suggesting potential methodological variances.

Conclusions: A significant number of QIs in pediatric asthma care have been proposed or documented in literature. Although most of these indicators prioritize the process of care, there is a conspicuous absence of outcome and structure indicators. This meta-analysis uncovered significant disparities in compliance to the identified QIs, highlighting the urgent necessity for targeted interventions to enhance pediatric asthma care in ED.

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
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine
Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Burden of Head Injuries in Iran from 1990 to 2019: Findings from The Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Traumatic Dental Injuries' Prevalence across Diverse Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in Predicting the Mortality of Fournier's Gangrene: Analysis of 14-Year Statistics of Referral Center. 4-methylumbilliferon (4-MU) as a Potential Treatment Against Cerebral ischemia and Reperfusion Injury in Rats; An Experimental Study. Monkeypox: A Comprehensive Review of Virology, Epidemiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, Prevention, Treatment, and Artificial Intelligence Applications.
×
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