Administration approaches of nursing assistants in hospitals: a scoping review

Author:

Zeng Ben-tuoORCID,Jin Yinghui,Cheng Shu-dong,Ding Yan-ming,Du Ji-wei

Abstract

ObjectivesThe administration of nursing assistants (NAs) is closely associated with patient outcomes, but studies evaluating intrahospital administration of NAs are limited. This study aimed to identify existing literature on intrahospital NAs’ administration approaches.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest, CNKI, APA PsycInfo, Wanfang Med, SinoMed, Ovid Emcare, NICE, AHRQ, CADTH, JBI EBP and Cochrane DSR were searched for articles published between January 2011 and March 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesQualitative, quantitative or mixed-method studies and evidence syntheses that evaluate administration approaches, models and appraisal tools of intrahospital NAs were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers conducted search, data selection and data extraction according to Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and methodology for scoping review. The quality of included studies was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool or AMSTAR V.2. Data were synthesised using narrative methods and frequency effect size analysis.ResultsThirty-six studies were eligible, with acceptable quality. We identified 1 administration model, 9 administration methods, 15 educational programmes and 7 appraisal tools from the included studies. The frequency effect size analysis yielded 15 topics of the main focus at four levels, suggesting that included articles were mainly (33%) focused on the competency of NAs, and the lectures were the most (80%) used strategy in quality improvement projects. Evidence from the studies was of low-to-moderate quality, indicating huge gaps between evidence-based research and management practice.ConclusionsPractical intrahospital administration approaches were revealed, and fifteen primarily focused topics were identified. We should explore this area more thoroughly using structured frameworks and standardised methodology. This scoping review will help managers find more effective ways to improve the quality of care. Researchers may focus more on evidence-based practice in NA administration using the 15 topics as a breakthrough.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference98 articles.

1. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics . 2018 soc definitions. Available: https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/soc_2018_definitions.pdf [Accessed 02 Dec 2021].

2. Eurostat . Healthcare personnel statistics - nursing and caring professionals. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Healthcare_personnel_statistics_-_nursing_and_caring_professionals [Accessed 06 Nov 2021].

3. Characterizing the direct care health workforce in the United States, 2010-2019;Jumabhoy;J Am Geriatr Soc,2022

4. NSI Nursing Solutions . NSI National Health Care Retention & RN Staffing Report; 2021. https://www.nsinursingsolutions.com/Documents/Library/NSI_National_Health_Care_Retention_Report.pdf [Accessed 19 Nov 2021].

5. United States registered nurse workforce report card and shortage forecast: a revisit;Zhang;Am J Med Qual,2018

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3