| Literature DB >> 36245935 |
Abstract
The Delphi method is also called an expert consultation method, scientifically measuring the objectivity, practicality, and authority of the metric. This study aims to build a standard plan for chronic disease management care services in hospitals and guide the development of chronic disease management care services. This article proposes a chronic disease management nursing experiment, further revises the current hospital chronic disease management nursing service, redesigns the program, compiles the chronic disease management hospital nursing standard list according to the new program, and uses expert suggestions to modify the standard program items. It adopts a preliminary expert inquiry table, submits Delphi expert inquiry, and constructs a chronic patient prevention strategy for clinical nursing practice to learn from the reference for guiding the actual specific situation of nursing, providing evidence basis and practice guidance. More than 40 initial standards were listed, which were reduced to 30 after revision. The importance of the indicators to different experts was 3.56 to 4.85 points. The coordination coefficient is 0.180~0.356. Finally, after discussion by all parties, more than 40 specific indicators including the size of the new standard have been determined, which provides a great theoretical basis for the establishment of a new type of hospital chronic disease management and nursing service standard in my country. Based on process reconstruction and the Delphi method determined by the hospital chronic disease management nursing service standards, clear normative and operability can provide basis for the development of chronic disease management nursing services.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36245935 PMCID: PMC9553666 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6713140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Bionics Biomech ISSN: 1176-2322 Impact factor: 1.664
Figure 1PR process entity diagram.
Figure 2Three stages of the PR mode.
Figure 3Schematic diagram of the specific process of the Delphi method.
Degree of coordination and its significance test results.
| Consultation rounds | Project | Coefficient of variation | Coordination coefficient and test results | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Degree of freedom |
| |||
| First round | First-level indicator | 0.09 ~ 0.11 | 0.204 | 2 | 0.021 |
| Secondary indicators | 0.05 ~ 0.16 | 0.180 | 12 | 0.016 | |
| Third-level indicators | 0.06 ~ 0.18 | 0.201 | 36 | 0.010 | |
| Second round | First-level indicator | 0.08 ~ 0.11 | 0.233 | 2 | 0.012 |
| Secondary indicators | 0.05 ~ 0.19 | 0.250 | 12 | 0.019 | |
| Third-level indicators | 0.05 ~ 0.16 | 0.130 | 35 | 0.008 | |
Figure 5My country's male and female data on chronic diseases.
Chronic disease management and nursing service standard program index system.
| Index | Importance assignment | Full score ratio (%) | Coefficient of variation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Structure | 4.53 + 0.51 | 52.63 | 0.11 |
| System construction | 4.79 + 0.42 | 78.95 | 0.09 |
| Enrollment of patients with chronic diseases | 4.58 + 0.51 | 57.89 | 0.11 |
| Create personal chronic disease files | 4.74 + 0.56 | 78.95 | 0.12 |
| Develop a chronic disease management plan and intervene | 4.79 + 0.42 | 78.95 | 0.09 |
| Evaluation of the effectiveness of chronic disease management | 4.84 + 0.37 | 84.21 | 0.08 |
Figure 6Number of chronic disease experts in my country in recent years.
Expert familiarity self-evaluation and results.
| Familiarity | Very familiar | Familiar | General | Unfamiliar | Unfamiliar |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantitative value | 2.0 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 1.2 |
| Expert frequency | 9 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Points | 1.10 | 1.05 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 0.9 |
| Number of people ( | 3 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 3 |
Figure 7Four trends in the proportion of patients with common chronic diseases in hospitalization.
Standard plan of hospital chronic disease management and nursing service.
| Field | Dimension | Hospital chronic disease management and nursing service standard plan and its measurement standards |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Chronic disease management and nursing service organization construction | 1.1 Organizational structure | The chief nurse is responsible for the chief supervision, and the chief nurse is responsible for department supervision |
| 1.2 System construction | The head nurse of each ward is responsible, with 2 nurses assisting | |
| 1.3 Facilities | Complete rate of basic and specialized equipment configuration ≥80% | |
| 1.4 Human Resources | Establishment of admission qualifications for chronic disease nursing staff in various specialties | |
| 2. Enrollment of patients with chronic diseases | 2.1 Inclusion criteria | All specialties set clear criteria for the inclusion of chronic disease patients |
| 3. Establish personal chronic disease files | 3.1 File content | Completion rate of health file content ≥95% |
| 4. Develop a chronic disease management plan and intervene | 4.1 Intervention plan | All specialties set up chronic disease intervention plans with specific time points |
| 5. Evaluation of the effectiveness of chronic disease management | 5.1 Outcome of the disease | Chronic disease complication rate within 2 years ≤30% |
Investigation results of Delphi experts' supplementary content.
| Entry | Main content | Yes | No | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frequency | Percentage (%) | Frequency | Percentage (%) | ||
| 1 | Triage time limit | 25 | 95 | 1 | 10 |
| 2 | Process opening | 24 | 94.44 | 2 | 7.69 |
| 3 | Patient assessment content | 24 | 95.55 | 2 | 7.86 |
| 4 | Vital signs measurement | 23 | 89.76 | 3 | 14.44 |
| 5 | Nurse doing electrocardiogram | 24 | 92.22 | 2 | 7.52 |
| 6 | Notice of consultation time | 23 | 87.66 | 3 | 18.86 |
| 7 | Staffing | 23 | 85.69 | 3 | 15.96 |