RNOtherRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2021

Indicators of Good Nursing Practices for Vulnerable Groups in Primary Health Care: A Scoping Review.

Emiko Yoshikawa Egry, Lucimara Fabiana Fornari, Monica Taminato and 2 others

PMID 34730764

WHAT IT FOUND

Primary care nursing for vulnerable groups was mapped to indicators such as vaccines, drug treatment, anthropometric measures, comorbidities, health literacy, social risk, home visits, trust and care quality.

The review did not validate these indicators.

Key findings

01The review mapped 1,095 potentially eligible studies and included 13 studies.

02The included studies involved vulnerable groups such as mothers, victims of intimate partner violence, children with chronic disease or at risk of violence, older adults with dementia or multimorbidity, and adolescents who were victims of violence, living on the streets, drug addicts or serving socio-educational measures.

03Indicators from the included studies were grouped according to the characteristics of good nursing practices implemented and evaluated in primary health care.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 13 studies were included after mapping 1,095 potentially eligible studies. The review did not use a validated instrument to evaluate the methodological quality of included studies. The indicators were not standardized or validated; the review only mapped existing indicators. The search was limited to the databases used and to the August 2020 collection period. All included studies were published in English.

Declared interests

Funding was from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Grant # 408589/2018-3, Brazil.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read this as proof that these indicators improve nursing care or patient outcomes. The review mapped indicators from 13 studies, did not standardize or validate them, and did not evaluate included studies with a validated quality instrument.

Read it on PubMed →