AIM: This paper is a report of the development and testing of the psychometric properties of an instrument to measure the accuracy of nursing documentation in general hospitals.BACKGROUND: Little information is available about the accuracy of nursing documentation. None of the existing instruments that quantify accuracy of nursing diagnoses, interventions, and progress and outcome evaluations are suitable to measure documentation in general hospital environments, nor were they intended for this purpose.METHOD: The D-Catch instrument, based on the Cat-ch-Ing instrument and the Scale for Degrees of Accuracy in Nursing Diagnoses, was developed in 2007-2008. Content validity of the D-Catch instrument was assessed by two Delphi panels, in which pairs of independent reviewers assessed 245 patient records in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Construct validity was assessed by explorative factor analysis with principal components and varimax rotation. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach's alpha. The inter-rater reliability of the D-Catch instrument was tested by calculating Cohen's weighted kappa (K(w)) for each pair of reviewers. Results. Quantity and quality variables were used to assess the accuracy of nursing documentation. Three constructs were identified in the factor analysis. 'Accuracy of the nursing diagnosis' was the only variable with substantial loading on component two (0.907) and a modest loading on component one (0.230). Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.722. The inter-rater reliability (K(w)) varied between 0.742 and 0.896.CONCLUSION: The D-Catch instrument is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to assess nursing documentation in general hospital settings.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy versus care as usual in primary care for patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS).MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled trial among primary care patients with PSS in the Netherlands that included 39 general practices and 34 psychosomatic therapists. The intervention, psychosomatic therapy, consisted of 6–12 sessions delivered by specialised exercise- and physiotherapists. Primary outcome measure: patient's level of functioning. Secondary outcomes: severity of physical and psychosocial symptoms, health-related quality of life, health-related anxiety, illness behaviour and number of GP contacts.ResultsCompared to usual care (n = 85), the intervention group (n = 84) showed no improvement in patient's level of functioning (mean difference − 0.50 [95% CI -1.10 to 0.10]; p = .10), and improvement in health-related anxiety (mean difference − 1.93 [95% CI -3.81 to −0.04]; p = .045), over 12 months. At 5-month follow-up, we found improvement in physical functioning, somatisation, and health-related anxiety. The 12-month follow-up revealed no therapy effects. Subgroup analyses showed an overall effect in patient's level of functioning for the group with moderate PSS (mean difference − 0.91 [95% CI -1.78 to −0.03]; p = .042). In the year after the end of therapy, the number of GP contacts did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionWe only found effects on some secondary outcome measures, and on our primary outcome measure especially in patients with moderate PSS, the psychosomatic therapy appears promising for further study.Trial registration: the trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR7356 under ID NTR7356.
MULTIFILE
Dit rapport gaat over de vraag welke interventies bijdragen aan een betere samenwerking tussen beoefenaars van diverse beroepsgroepen in de zorg. De vraag is gesteld naar aanleiding van het pilotproject multiprofessioneel onderwijs (MPO) dat in 1999 is gestart in Nijmegen. Ter begeleiding van de verdere ontwikkeling en de wetenschappelijke onderbouwing, ook in verband met een verdere verspreiding van resultaten, is er behoefte aan onderzoek. Dit rapport is het resultaat van een vooronderzoek, gebaseerd op literatuuronderzoek en aangevuld met vijf interviews.
