Development of an indicator framework for assessing nursing quality in interventional therapy for intracranial aneurysms in China

The objective of this study is to devise an indicator system to assess the quality of nursing care in the context of interventional therapy for intracranial aneurysms (IA) in China. This will furnish a standardized and quantitative framework for the monitoring and assessment of nursing quality withi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in neurology 2024, Vol.15, p.1403637
Hauptverfasser: Yang, Hai-Xia, Fan, Ben-Fang, Zhao, Jia, Ji, Jian-Hong, Ding, Wen-Bin, Shen, Wei-Guang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The objective of this study is to devise an indicator system to assess the quality of nursing care in the context of interventional therapy for intracranial aneurysms (IA) in China. This will furnish a standardized and quantitative framework for the monitoring and assessment of nursing quality within the IA interventional therapeutic field. The indicators and their associated weights within the evaluation system for nursing quality in interventional therapy for IA were determined based on the theoretical framework of the three-dimensional quality model, specifically the "structure-process-outcome" paradigm. This was achieved by using several methodological approaches, such as literature analysis, semi-structured interviews, expert consultations, the Delphi method, and the analytic hierarchy process. Expert consultations were conducted over two rounds, with questionnaires distributed via email and WeChat. Both rounds yielded a questionnaire return rate of 100%. Across these consultations, pertinent statistical measures were obtained, such as the expert authority coefficient (Cr), the coefficient of variation (CV), and Kendall's harmony coefficient, which exhibited values of 0.886 and 0.952, 0-0.193 and 0-0.185, and 0.138 and 0.149, respectively. These findings indicated statistically significant differences (
ISSN:1664-2295
1664-2295
DOI:10.3389/fneur.2024.1403637