PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Self-care is a necessary measure against occupational injuries of nurses and improves nursing performance at the bedside. Nurses have different scales to measure self-care, and researchers are confused about choosing valid and reliable scales. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of self-care scales in nurses to identify the best available scales.
METHODS: Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and ProQuest) were systematically searched, with no date limiters, until 9 Jun 2023. A manual search was performed with Google Scholar and the reference list of articles to complete the search. Studies aiming to develop or determine the measurement properties of self-care in nurses were included. Based on Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments, the methodological quality of the studies was determined, and the result of each study on a measurement property was rated (sufficient, insufficient, or indeterminate). The quality of the evidence was graded using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (high, moderate, low, or very low). These processes were used to make recommendations and identify the best scale to assess self-care in nurses.
RESULTS: Out of 8601 articles, six articles with five different scales were included. Only internal consistency was reported across all scales. Criterion validity, measurement error, responsiveness, feasibility, and interpretability, were not reported in any of them. Content validity was reported only in two studies with inconsistent results and low-quality evidence. None of the scales had methodological quality with a rating of very good and sufficient high-quality evidence for all measurement properties.
CONCLUSIONS: None of the scales is strongly recommended to measure self-care in nurses. Only the Professional self-care scale is temporarily recommended until their quality is assessed in future studies. Considering that the content of the examined scales does not meet all the professional self-care needs of nurses, designing a valid, reliable, and specialized scale for nurses is needed.
METHODS: Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and ProQuest) were systematically searched, with no date limiters, until 9 Jun 2023. A manual search was performed with Google Scholar and the reference list of articles to complete the search. Studies aiming to develop or determine the measurement properties of self-care in nurses were included. Based on Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments, the methodological quality of the studies was determined, and the result of each study on a measurement property was rated (sufficient, insufficient, or indeterminate). The quality of the evidence was graded using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (high, moderate, low, or very low). These processes were used to make recommendations and identify the best scale to assess self-care in nurses.
RESULTS: Out of 8601 articles, six articles with five different scales were included. Only internal consistency was reported across all scales. Criterion validity, measurement error, responsiveness, feasibility, and interpretability, were not reported in any of them. Content validity was reported only in two studies with inconsistent results and low-quality evidence. None of the scales had methodological quality with a rating of very good and sufficient high-quality evidence for all measurement properties.
CONCLUSIONS: None of the scales is strongly recommended to measure self-care in nurses. Only the Professional self-care scale is temporarily recommended until their quality is assessed in future studies. Considering that the content of the examined scales does not meet all the professional self-care needs of nurses, designing a valid, reliable, and specialized scale for nurses is needed.
摘要：
背景：自我护理是应对护士职业伤害的必要措施，可提高床边护理绩效。护士有不同的尺度来衡量自我护理，研究人员对选择有效和可靠的量表感到困惑。本系统评价旨在评估护士自我护理量表的测量特性，以确定最佳的可用量表。
方法：四个数据库(PubMed，WebofScience,Scopus,和ProQuest)进行了系统搜索，没有日期限制，直到2023年6月9日。使用GoogleScholar和文章的参考列表进行了手动搜索以完成搜索。包括旨在开发或确定护士自我护理的测量特性的研究。基于基于共识的健康测量仪器选择标准，确定了研究的方法学质量，并对测量特性的每项研究结果进行评级(足够，不足,或不确定)。使用修改后的建议分级评估对证据的质量进行分级，发展,和评估方法(高，中度,低,或非常低)。这些过程用于提出建议并确定评估护士自我护理的最佳量表。
结果：在8601篇文章中，包括六篇具有五种不同量表的文章。在所有量表中仅报告内部一致性。标准效度，测量误差,响应性、响应性可行性,和可解释性，没有在其中任何一个报告。仅在两项研究中报告了内容效度，结果不一致且证据质量低。没有一个量表具有方法学质量，对所有测量特性都具有非常好和足够的高质量证据。
结论：强烈建议使用这些量表来衡量护士的自我护理能力。在未来的研究中评估其质量之前，暂时只建议使用专业自我护理量表。考虑到检查量表的内容不能满足护士的所有专业自我护理需求，设计一个有效的，可靠,护士需要专门的规模。
方法：四个数据库(PubMed，WebofScience,Scopus,和ProQuest)进行了系统搜索，没有日期限制，直到2023年6月9日。使用GoogleScholar和文章的参考列表进行了手动搜索以完成搜索。包括旨在开发或确定护士自我护理的测量特性的研究。基于基于共识的健康测量仪器选择标准，确定了研究的方法学质量，并对测量特性的每项研究结果进行评级(足够，不足,或不确定)。使用修改后的建议分级评估对证据的质量进行分级，发展,和评估方法(高，中度,低,或非常低)。这些过程用于提出建议并确定评估护士自我护理的最佳量表。
结果：在8601篇文章中，包括六篇具有五种不同量表的文章。在所有量表中仅报告内部一致性。标准效度，测量误差,响应性、响应性可行性,和可解释性，没有在其中任何一个报告。仅在两项研究中报告了内容效度，结果不一致且证据质量低。没有一个量表具有方法学质量，对所有测量特性都具有非常好和足够的高质量证据。
结论：强烈建议使用这些量表来衡量护士的自我护理能力。在未来的研究中评估其质量之前，暂时只建议使用专业自我护理量表。考虑到检查量表的内容不能满足护士的所有专业自我护理需求，设计一个有效的，可靠,护士需要专门的规模。
