Appraisal and evaluation of the instruments measuring the nursing work environment: A systematic review

Chang, Yu-Chun; Chang, Hsin Yi; Feng, Jui Ying

doi:10.1111/jonm.13559

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Healthcare organisations are urged to continue working towards a more diverse and inclusive WE 42 44. Although the importance of a diverse and inclusive WE is evident, we are not aware of any instrument measuring the diversity and inclusivity of healthcare employees’ WE 15 16…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A common strategy for healthcare organisations to gain insight into employees’ perceptions of their WE is to conduct a (satisfaction) survey 14. Multiple validated questionnaires are available to assess WE, each with a slightly different area of focus, target audience or length 15 16. These questionnaires are commonly composed of statements linked to Likert-type scales that ask how much a respondent agrees with the specific statement 16.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic RADaR analysis of responses to the open-ended question in the Culture of Care Barometer survey of a Dutch hospital

Maassen,

Spruit-van Bentvelzen,

Weggelaar-Jansen

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesSystematically measuring the work environment of healthcare employees is key to continuously improving the quality of care and addressing staff shortages. In this study, we systematically analyse the responses to the one open-ended question posed in the Dutch version of the Culture of Care Barometer (CoCB-NL) to examine (1) if the responses offered new insights into healthcare employees’ perceptions of their work environment and (2) if the original CoCB had any themes missing.DesignRetrospective text analysis using Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction technique.SettingUniversity hospital in the Netherlands using the CoCB-NL as part of the annual employee survey.ParticipantsAll hospital employees were invited to participate in the study (N=14 671). In total, 2287 employees responded to the open-ended question.Results2287 comments were analysed. Comments that contained more than one topic were split according to topic, adding to the total (n=2915). Of this total, 372 comments were excluded because they lacked content or respondents indicated they had nothing to add. Subsequently, 2543 comments were allocated to 33 themes. Most comments (n=2113) addressed the 24 themes related to the close-ended questions in the CoCB-NL. The themes most commented on concerned questions on ‘organisational support’. The remaining 430 comments covered nine additional themes that addressed concerns about work environment factors (team connectedness, team effectiveness, corporate vision, administrative burden and performance pressure) and themes (diversity and inclusion, legal frameworks and collective bargaining, resilience and work–life balance, and personal matters).ConclusionsAnalysing responses to the open-ended question in the CoCB-NL led to new insights into relevant elements of the work environment and missing themes in the COCB-NL. Moreover, the analysis revealed important themes that not only require attention from healthcare organisations to ensure adequate improvements in their employees’ work environment but should also be considered to further develop the CoCB-NL.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic RADaR analysis of responses to the open-ended question in the Culture of Care Barometer survey of a Dutch hospital

Maassen,

Spruit-van Bentvelzen,

Weggelaar-Jansen

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These guidelines were initially developed to conduct systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). In recent times, these have been adapted to healthy individuals or caregiver-reported outcome measures [ 21 ]. In accordance with the guideline, two reviewers independently evaluated the content validity of each instrument in three steps.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraisal and Evaluation of the Learning Environment Instruments of the Student Nurse: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Nursing education consists of theory and practice, and student nurses’ perception of the learning environment, both educational and clinical, is one of the elements that determines the success or failure of their university study path. This study aimed to identify the currently available tools for measuring the clinical and educational learning environments of student nurses and to evaluate their measurement properties in order to provide solid evidence for researchers, educators, and clinical tutors to use in the selection of tools. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the psychometric properties of self-reported learning environment tools in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Guidelines of 2018. The research was conducted on the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, and ERIC. Results: In the literature, 14 instruments were found that evaluate both the traditional and simulated clinical learning environments and the educational learning environments of student nurses. These tools can be ideally divided into first-generation tools developed from different learning theories and second-generation tools developed by mixing, reviewing, and integrating different already-validated tools. Conclusion: Not all the relevant psychometric properties of the instruments were evaluated, and the methodological approaches used were often doubtful or inadequate, thus threatening the instruments’ external validity. Further research is needed to complete the validation processes undertaken for both new and already developed instruments, using higher-quality methods and evaluating all psychometric properties.

show abstract

“…To conduct the data synthesis, we used the COSMIN guidelines. In recent years, these guidelines, initially developed to conduct systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), have been used to assess outcomes in healthy individuals or caregivers [21]. The evaluation and synthesis process is divided into two phases: one that evaluates and summarizes the evidence on the development and validation studies' quality and one that evaluates and summarizes the evidence on the measurement properties of the instruments.…”

Section: Qualitative Evaluation Of Studies Psychometric Properties An...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Standard Precautions Compliance Instruments: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Standard precautions (SPs) are first-line strategies with a dual goal: to protect health care workers from occupational contamination while providing care to infected patients and to prevent/reduce health care-associated infections (HAIs). This study aimed at (1) identifying the instruments currently available for measuring healthcare professionals’ compliance with standard precautions; (2) evaluating their measurement properties; and (3) providing sound evidence for instrument selection for use by researchers, teachers, staff trainers, and clinical tutors. Methods: We carried out a systematic review to examine the psychometric properties of standard precautions self-assessment instruments in conformity with the COSMIN guidelines. The search was conducted on the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and APA PsycInfo. Results: Thirteen instruments were identified. These were classified into four categories of tools assessing: compliance with universal precautions, adherence to standard precautions, compliance with hand hygiene, and adherence to transmission-based guidelines and precautions. The psychometric properties of instruments and methodological approaches of the included studies were often not satisfactory. Only four instruments were classified as high-quality measurements. Conclusions: The available instruments that measure healthcare professionals’ compliance with standard precautions are of low-moderate quality. It is necessary that future research completes the validation processes undertaken for long-established and newly developed instruments, using higher-quality methods and estimating all psychometric properties.

show abstract

Appraisal and evaluation of the instruments measuring the nursing work environment: A systematic review

Cited by 5 publications

References 51 publications

Systematic RADaR analysis of responses to the open-ended question in the Culture of Care Barometer survey of a Dutch hospital

Systematic RADaR analysis of responses to the open-ended question in the Culture of Care Barometer survey of a Dutch hospital

Appraisal and Evaluation of the Learning Environment Instruments of the Student Nurse: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology

Evaluation of Standard Precautions Compliance Instruments: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Methodology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About