新生儿重症监护病房入院和出院清单的编制和有效性。

Q3 Nursing Revista gaucha de enfermagem / EENFUFRGS Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1983-1447.2024.20240132.en
Catharine Galvão Diniz, Giulia Ribeiro Schettino Regne, Daniela Cristina Zica Silva, Allana Dos Reis Corrêa, Luciana Regina Ferreira da Mata, Bruna Figueiredo Manzo
{"title":"新生儿重症监护病房入院和出院清单的编制和有效性。","authors":"Catharine Galvão Diniz, Giulia Ribeiro Schettino Regne, Daniela Cristina Zica Silva, Allana Dos Reis Corrêa, Luciana Regina Ferreira da Mata, Bruna Figueiredo Manzo","doi":"10.1590/1983-1447.2024.20240132.en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and validate the content of checklists for safe admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A methodological study conducted between 2018 and 2020 in four stages: 1) literature review; 2) checklist construction; 3) content validity by 32 neonatal nursing specialists from different Brazilian states, predominantly from the southeastern region; 4) development of the final version of the instruments. Validity was performed using a Likert-type scale. Items with a Content Validity Index of 0.90 or higher were accepted. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The contents of two checklists were constructed and validated: one for admission, with 18 items, and another for discharge, with seven items. For the admission checklist, 41.03% of items were validated in the first round, 33.33%, in the second, and 23.08%, in the third. One item was excluded for not achieving the minimum Content Validity Index (>0.90). For the discharge checklist, all items achieved a CVI ≥ 0.90, with 64.7% validated in the first round and 35.3% in the second round. No items were excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The content of patient safety checklists for admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units was considered valid.</p>","PeriodicalId":35609,"journal":{"name":"Revista gaucha de enfermagem / EENFUFRGS","volume":"45 spe1","pages":"e20240132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elaboration and validity of admission and discharge checklists in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.\",\"authors\":\"Catharine Galvão Diniz, Giulia Ribeiro Schettino Regne, Daniela Cristina Zica Silva, Allana Dos Reis Corrêa, Luciana Regina Ferreira da Mata, Bruna Figueiredo Manzo\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1983-1447.2024.20240132.en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and validate the content of checklists for safe admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A methodological study conducted between 2018 and 2020 in four stages: 1) literature review; 2) checklist construction; 3) content validity by 32 neonatal nursing specialists from different Brazilian states, predominantly from the southeastern region; 4) development of the final version of the instruments. Validity was performed using a Likert-type scale. Items with a Content Validity Index of 0.90 or higher were accepted. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The contents of two checklists were constructed and validated: one for admission, with 18 items, and another for discharge, with seven items. For the admission checklist, 41.03% of items were validated in the first round, 33.33%, in the second, and 23.08%, in the third. One item was excluded for not achieving the minimum Content Validity Index (>0.90). For the discharge checklist, all items achieved a CVI ≥ 0.90, with 64.7% validated in the first round and 35.3% in the second round. No items were excluded.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The content of patient safety checklists for admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units was considered valid.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista gaucha de enfermagem / EENFUFRGS\",\"volume\":\"45 spe1\",\"pages\":\"e20240132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista gaucha de enfermagem / EENFUFRGS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2024.20240132.en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista gaucha de enfermagem / EENFUFRGS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2024.20240132.en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:制定和验证新生儿重症监护病房安全入院和出院检查清单的内容。方法:2018 - 2020年进行方法学研究,分四个阶段进行:1)文献综述;2)检查表构建;3)来自巴西不同州的32名新生儿护理专家的内容效度,主要来自东南部地区;4)开发仪器的最终版本。效度采用李克特量表。内容效度指数为0.90或更高的项目被接受。采用描述性统计进行数据分析。结果:构建并验证了两份检查表的内容:入院检查表共18项,出院检查表共7项。入院检查表第一轮有41.03%的项目被确认,第二轮为33.33%,第三轮为23.08%。1项因未达到最低内容效度指数(>0.90)而被排除。出院检查表中所有项目的CVI≥0.90,第一轮确认率为64.7%,第二轮确认率为35.3%。没有项目被排除在外。结论:新生儿重症监护病房住院和出院患者安全检查表的内容是有效的。
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
Elaboration and validity of admission and discharge checklists in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

Objective: To develop and validate the content of checklists for safe admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

Methods: A methodological study conducted between 2018 and 2020 in four stages: 1) literature review; 2) checklist construction; 3) content validity by 32 neonatal nursing specialists from different Brazilian states, predominantly from the southeastern region; 4) development of the final version of the instruments. Validity was performed using a Likert-type scale. Items with a Content Validity Index of 0.90 or higher were accepted. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

Results: The contents of two checklists were constructed and validated: one for admission, with 18 items, and another for discharge, with seven items. For the admission checklist, 41.03% of items were validated in the first round, 33.33%, in the second, and 23.08%, in the third. One item was excluded for not achieving the minimum Content Validity Index (>0.90). For the discharge checklist, all items achieved a CVI ≥ 0.90, with 64.7% validated in the first round and 35.3% in the second round. No items were excluded.

Conclusion: The content of patient safety checklists for admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units was considered valid.

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
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
118
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: A Escola de Enfermagem da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul edita e publica a Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem para divulgar a produção científica da Enfermagem e áreas afins. Foi criada em 1976 e atualmente tem periodicidade trimestral.
期刊最新文献
Risks that cause illness, voices that warn: leadership strategies in supporting healthcare workers. Auriculotherapy and Baduanjin Qigong on insomnia and quality of life in students: a quasi-experimental study. Development of an indicator matrix for the quality of care for older adults in emergencies. Aspects hindering the quality of tuberculosis care records in primary health care. Socioeconomic inequalities in health-related risk and protective behaviors among pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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