呼吸道传染病危重患者院际转运护理质量评价指标体系构建

Construction of a nursing quality evaluation index system for inter-hospital transport of critically ill patients with respiratory infectious diseases

  • 摘要: 背景 呼吸道传染病危重患者院际转运风险高、环节多,转运不良事件发生率较高,但现有护理质量缺乏专用的评价指标体系。目的 构建呼吸道传染病危重患者院际转运护理质量评价指标体系,为呼吸道传染病危重患者院际转运护理质量评价提供参考,为转运患者的救护安全提供保障。方法 基于Donabedian 三维结构理论,通过文献分析提取初始指标条目池;对12 名医护人员、转运司机及患者家属进行半结构式访谈,补充条目形成指标体系初稿;于2025 年2 — 8 月遴选15 名来自急救护理、重症护理、传染病护理、感染防控等领域的专家,开展3 轮德尔菲专家函询,对指标进行筛选与修订;运用层次分析法确定各级指标权重,最终构建评价指标体系。结果 文献分析共提取3 个一级、13 个二级、40 个三级指标。半结构访谈提炼11 个主题,补充了转运心理护理、职业暴露处置等实践指标,形成涵盖结构、过程、结果3 个一级指标,11 个二级指标及45 个三级指标的评价指标体系初稿。3轮德尔菲函询每轮均发放15 份问卷,有效回收率均为100%,专家权威系数分别为0.83、0.89、0.91,整体指标的肯德尔协调系数分别为0.184、0.194、0.185(P均<0.001),经3轮函询修订,最终形成包含组织制度与资源准备、转运全流程管理、转运质量与安全评价3 个一级指标、9 个二级指标、27个三级指标的护理质量评价指标体系。结论 本研究构建了一个维度完整、权重合理的呼吸道传染病危重患者院际转运护理质量评价指标体系,可为该类患者转运护理质量的标准化评估与持续改进提供科学参考框架。

     

    Abstract: Background The inter-hospital transfer of critically ill patients with respiratory infectious diseases involves high risks and multiple procedures, with a relatively high incidence of adverse transfer events. However, the existing nursing quality assessment lacks a specific evaluation index system. Objective To construct a nursing quality evaluation index system for interhospital transfer of critically ill patients with respiratory infectious diseases, thereby providing references for evaluating nursing quality and ensuring patient safety during transfer. Methods Based on Donabedian's three-dimensional structure theory, an initial indicator pool was derived through literature analysis. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 healthcare professionals, ambulance drivers, and family members of patients to supplement the indicators and form a preliminary version of the index system. From February to August 2025, 15 experts in emergency nursing, critical care nursing, infectious disease nursing, infection prevention and control, and related fields were selected to participate in three rounds of Delphi expert consultation for indicator screening and revision. The analytic hierarchy process was used to determine the weights of indicators at each level, and the final evaluation index system was established. Results Literature analysis yielded 3 first-level, 13 second-level, and 40 third-level indicators. Semi-structured interviews generated 11 themes and added practical indicators such as psychological care during transfer and management of occupational exposure, resulting in a preliminary system comprising 3 first-level (structure, process, outcome), 11 second-level, and 45 third-level indicators. In each of the three Delphi rounds, 15 questionnaires were distributed, and the effective response rate was 100%. The expert authority coefficients were 0.83, 0.89, and 0.91, respectively; the Kendall's coefficients of concordance for the overall set of indicators were 0.184, 0.194, and 0.185 (all P < 0.001). After three rounds of revision, the final nursing quality evaluation index system consisted of 3 first-level indicators (organizational system and resource preparation, fullprocess management of transfer, and transfer quality and safety evaluation), 9 second-level indicators, and 27 third-level indicators. Conclusion The constructed nursing quality evaluation index system for inter-hospital transfer of critically ill patients with respiratory infectious diseases has complete dimensions and reasonable weights, providing a scientific reference framework for standardized assessment and continuous improvement of transfer nursing quality for this patient population.

     

/

返回文章
返回