Alannah L. Cooper, Georgia Roberts, Desley G. Hegney, Janie A. Brown
{"title":"用于测量护士弹性样本的工具的范围审查","authors":"Alannah L. Cooper, Georgia Roberts, Desley G. Hegney, Janie A. Brown","doi":"10.1111/jan.16769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To identify and critically appraise instruments that have been used to measure nurse resilience.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>A scoping review.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data Sources</h3>\n \n <p>Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using four electronic databases CINAHL Ultimate, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Emcare from the year 2012 to December 2024.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The titles, then abstracts, of retrieved articles were screened by the authors against inclusion and exclusion criteria, then full-text screening was performed using Rayyan. Data about the study characteristics and the instruments used to measure nurse resilience were extracted. Copies of the instruments used to measure resilience were obtained and appraised.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the <i>n</i> = 4694 publications identified in the initial search <i>n</i> = 386 were included in the scoping review. Studies originated in <i>n</i> = 45 countries, the majority were conducted in China (<i>n</i> = 119) and the United States of America (<i>n</i> = 53). Across the <i>n</i> = 386 included studies, <i>n</i> = 15 instruments to measure resilience were identified and critically appraised. The scores for the instruments critically appraised ranged from 0 to 6 out of a total possible score of 11. Synthesis of results examined instrument development, instrument features and application of instruments.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Critical appraisal of the instruments used to measure nurse resilience revealed significant deficiencies. None of the instruments included all of the key attributes and factors that influence nurse resilience. There was a predominant focus on individual factors and little consideration of the influence of nursing work environments. Due to the shortcomings of the existing instruments, there are currently substantial limitations in our understanding of nurse resilience and how to measure it.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Implications for the Profession</h3>\n \n <p>A profession-specific comprehensive measure of nurse resilience needs to be developed to better capture the attributes of nurse resilience.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Impact</h3>\n \n <p>This review highlights the limitations of instruments applied to measure nurse resilience.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Reporting Method</h3>\n \n <p>The JBI scoping review framework.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>No patient or public contribution.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54897,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","volume":"81 9","pages":"5718-5762"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jan.16769","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Scoping Review of Instruments Used to Measure Resilience in Samples of Nurses\",\"authors\":\"Alannah L. Cooper, Georgia Roberts, Desley G. Hegney, Janie A. Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jan.16769\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>To identify and critically appraise instruments that have been used to measure nurse resilience.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design</h3>\\n \\n <p>A scoping review.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Data Sources</h3>\\n \\n <p>Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using four electronic databases CINAHL Ultimate, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Emcare from the year 2012 to December 2024.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The titles, then abstracts, of retrieved articles were screened by the authors against inclusion and exclusion criteria, then full-text screening was performed using Rayyan. Data about the study characteristics and the instruments used to measure nurse resilience were extracted. Copies of the instruments used to measure resilience were obtained and appraised.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of the <i>n</i> = 4694 publications identified in the initial search <i>n</i> = 386 were included in the scoping review. Studies originated in <i>n</i> = 45 countries, the majority were conducted in China (<i>n</i> = 119) and the United States of America (<i>n</i> = 53). Across the <i>n</i> = 386 included studies, <i>n</i> = 15 instruments to measure resilience were identified and critically appraised. The scores for the instruments critically appraised ranged from 0 to 6 out of a total possible score of 11. Synthesis of results examined instrument development, instrument features and application of instruments.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Critical appraisal of the instruments used to measure nurse resilience revealed significant deficiencies. None of the instruments included all of the key attributes and factors that influence nurse resilience. There was a predominant focus on individual factors and little consideration of the influence of nursing work environments. Due to the shortcomings of the existing instruments, there are currently substantial limitations in our understanding of nurse resilience and how to measure it.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Implications for the Profession</h3>\\n \\n <p>A profession-specific comprehensive measure of nurse resilience needs to be developed to better capture the attributes of nurse resilience.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Impact</h3>\\n \\n <p>This review highlights the limitations of instruments applied to measure nurse resilience.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Reporting Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>The JBI scoping review framework.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\\n \\n <p>No patient or public contribution.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54897,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Nursing\",\"volume\":\"81 9\",\"pages\":\"5718-5762\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jan.16769\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jan.16769\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jan.16769","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Scoping Review of Instruments Used to Measure Resilience in Samples of Nurses
Aim
To identify and critically appraise instruments that have been used to measure nurse resilience.
Design
A scoping review.
Data Sources
Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using four electronic databases CINAHL Ultimate, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Emcare from the year 2012 to December 2024.
Methods
The titles, then abstracts, of retrieved articles were screened by the authors against inclusion and exclusion criteria, then full-text screening was performed using Rayyan. Data about the study characteristics and the instruments used to measure nurse resilience were extracted. Copies of the instruments used to measure resilience were obtained and appraised.
Results
Of the n = 4694 publications identified in the initial search n = 386 were included in the scoping review. Studies originated in n = 45 countries, the majority were conducted in China (n = 119) and the United States of America (n = 53). Across the n = 386 included studies, n = 15 instruments to measure resilience were identified and critically appraised. The scores for the instruments critically appraised ranged from 0 to 6 out of a total possible score of 11. Synthesis of results examined instrument development, instrument features and application of instruments.
Conclusion
Critical appraisal of the instruments used to measure nurse resilience revealed significant deficiencies. None of the instruments included all of the key attributes and factors that influence nurse resilience. There was a predominant focus on individual factors and little consideration of the influence of nursing work environments. Due to the shortcomings of the existing instruments, there are currently substantial limitations in our understanding of nurse resilience and how to measure it.
Implications for the Profession
A profession-specific comprehensive measure of nurse resilience needs to be developed to better capture the attributes of nurse resilience.
Impact
This review highlights the limitations of instruments applied to measure nurse resilience.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Advanced Nursing (JAN) contributes to the advancement of evidence-based nursing, midwifery and healthcare by disseminating high quality research and scholarship of contemporary relevance and with potential to advance knowledge for practice, education, management or policy.
All JAN papers are required to have a sound scientific, evidential, theoretical or philosophical base and to be critical, questioning and scholarly in approach. As an international journal, JAN promotes diversity of research and scholarship in terms of culture, paradigm and healthcare context. For JAN’s worldwide readership, authors are expected to make clear the wider international relevance of their work and to demonstrate sensitivity to cultural considerations and differences.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
