Search

The decision-making in clinical nursing, regarding diagnoses, interventions and outcomes, can be assessed using standardized language systems such as NANDA International, the Nursing Interventions Classification and the Nursing Outcome Classification; these taxonomies are the most commonly used by nurses in informatized clinical records. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of the nursing process with standardized terminology using the NANDA International, the Nursing Interventions Classification and the Nursing Outcome Classification in care practice to assess the association between the presence of the related/risk factors and the clinical decision-making about nursing diagnosis, assessing the effectiveness of nursing interventions and health outcomes, and increasing people's satisfaction. A systematic review was carried out in Medline and PreMedline (OvidSP), Embase (Embase-Elsevier), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), CINAHL (EbscoHOST), SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI and Scielo (WOS), LILACS (Health Virtual Library) and SCOPUS (SCOPUS-Elsevier) and included randomized clinical trials as well as quasi-experimental, cohort and case-control studies. Selection and critical appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Methodology. A total of 17 studies were included with variability in the level and certainty of evidence. According to the outcomes, 6 studies assessed diagnostic decision-making and 11 assessed improvements in individual health outcomes. No studies assessed improvements in intervention effectiveness or population satisfaction. There is a need to increase studies with rigorous methodologies that address clinical decision-making about nursing diagnoses using NANDA International and individuals' health outcomes using the Nursing Interventions Classification and the Nursing Outcome Classification as well as implementing studies that assess the use of these terminologies for improvements in the effectiveness of nurses' interventions and population satisfaction with the nursing process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Midwifery empowerment is an important topic. The most widely used instrument to measure the perceived empowerment of midwives is the Perceptions of Empowerment in Midwifery Scale (PEMS), which has not been validated in Spain. The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the PEMS to the Spanish context. This research was carried out in two phases; Phase 1: Methodological study; translation, backtranslation and cross-cultural adaptation of the PEMS and pilot study on the target population (10 midwives) for evaluation of face validity. Phase 2: Cross-sectional observational study to obtain a sample for construct validation by Exploratory Factor Analysis and measurement of PEMS-e reliability. Additionally, an inferential analysis was carried out to study the possible association between several collected variables and PEMS-e subscale-scores. A total of 410 midwives from 18 Spanish regions participated in the study through an online questionnaire. An initial Spanish version of the PEMS scale was produced, demonstrating adequate face validity. A final model was produced for the PEMS-e, which included 17 items classified into two subscales ("Organizational support" and "Own skills and teamwork") with fit indexes RMSEA = 0.062 (95%CI: 0.048–0.065) and AGFI = 0.985 (95%CI: 0.983–0.989) and Cronbach's alpha 0.922 for the total scale. Results showed that one in four midwives had considered abandoning the profession in the last 6 months (p ≤ 0.001). This research suggests that Spanish midwives perceive their empowerment level as low. The PEMS-e is a valid tool with solid psychometric properties that can be used in future research to identify factors that contribute to increased empowerment among Spanish midwives and inform strategies to improve job satisfaction and retention in the profession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]