Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken.Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Ital-ian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient’s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument.Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended.  

Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Italian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient’s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument. Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended

Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Italian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient’s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument. Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended

Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

Aims. With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Results. A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Italian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient\u2019s problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument. Conclusions. Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended

Clinical assessment instruments validated for nursing practice in the Italian context: a systematic review of the literature

AIMS: With the aim to identify the instruments validated for Italian nursing practice, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken.RESULTS: A total of 101 instruments emerged. The majority (89; 88.1%) were developed in other countries; the remaining (14; 13.9%) were developed and validated in the Italian context. The instruments were developed to measure patient's problems (63/101; 62.4%), outcomes (27/101; 26.7%), risks (4/101; 4%) and others issues (7/101; 6.9%). The majority of participants involved in the validation processes were younger adults (49; 48.5%), older adults (40; 39.5%), children (4; 4%), adolescents (3; 3%), and children/adolescents (1; 1%). The instruments were structured primarily in the form of questionnaires (61; 60.4%), as a grid for direct observation (27; 26.7%) or in other forms (12; 11.9%). Among the 101 instruments emerged, there were 1 to 7 validation measures documented with on average 3.2 (95% CI 2.86-3.54) for each instrument.CONCLUSIONS: Developing validation studies giving priority to those instruments widely adopted in the clinical nursing practice is recommended