Mapeamento de escalas de competências validadas para enfermeiras e enfermeiros: uma revisão de escopo
Data
2023-04-14
Autores
Senes, Aline de Melo 
Orientadores
Cunha, Isabel Cristina Kowal Olm
Tipo
Dissertação de mestrado
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Resumo
Este estudo teve por objetivo mapear na literatura mundial as escalas validadas para mensurar a competência de enfermeiras e enfermeiros. Foi realizada Revisão de Escopo, segundo a metodologia do Instituto Joana Briggs – JBI, e de acordo com as etapas propostas no Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic re-views and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Re-views (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. A estratégia de busca completa foi realizada nas seguintes bases: BVS, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Psycinfo, Embase, Science Direct, JBI, Theses Canada, DART-E, BDTD, CAPES, CIBERTESYS e RCAAP. Não houve restrição de idioma, ano de publicação ou origem. A seleção dos artigos e a extração de dados foram realizadas por dois revisores de forma independente. Foram incluídos artigos originais ou de revisão de literatura que explorassem escalas validadas pela psicometria para mensurar a competência unidimensional e/ou multidimensional de enfermeiros e enfermeiros. Como resultado foram identificados 4.175 artigos e 269 teses nas bases citadas. Após a leitura fez-se a exclusão dos estudos duplicados e os não pertinentes, restando amostra de 93 artigos com escalas validadas e nenhuma tese. As escalas foram então classificadas considerando os processos de trabalho do enfermeiro. Assim, identificaram-se 7 (7,52%) escalas na área da gestão, 11 (11,82%) no ensino e 75 (80,64%) na assistência. Não foram identificadas para a pesquisa e participação política. A maior parte (69=74,19%) foram referentes a escalas originais construídas e apenas 24 (25,80%) foram adaptações transculturais de escalas já existentes. Quanto à validação das escalas, 90 (96,77%) possuíam evidências de validade e confiabilidade como resultado final da validação psicométrica. As escalas variaram entre 11 até 120 itens / subitens. Em relação ao idioma original da escala, 75 estavam no idioma inglês, 10 em coreano, 4 em português, 3 em japonês e 1 em espanhol. Concluiu-se, que a maior parte das escalas identificadas estavam no idioma inglês, foram publicados na Coréia (14=15,05%), eram originais e diziam respeito à aspectos da assistência. Os instrumentos estavam estruturados nas mais distintas formas, com uma variação grande de itens a serem avaliados. Também foram variados os tipos de análise empregados na verificação das evidências de validade e confiabilidade, o que demonstra que não há possibilidade de um consenso visto que cada instrumento demanda seus próprios testes analíticos.
This study aimed to map validated scales to measure the competence of nurses in the world literature. A Scope Review was carried out, according to the methodology of the Joana Briggs Institute – JBI, and according to the steps proposed in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic re-views and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Re-views (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. The complete search strategy was performed in the following databases: BVS, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Psycinfo, Embase, Science Direct, JBI, Theses Canada, DART-E, BDTD, CAPES, CIBERTESYS and RCAAP. There was no language restriction, year of publication or origin. Article selection and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently. Original articles or literature reviews that explored scales validated by psychometry to measure the unidimensional and/or multidimensional competence of nurses and male nurses were included. As a result, 4,175 articles and 269 theses were identified in the aforementioned databases. After reading, duplicate and non-relevant studies were excluded, leaving a sample of 93 articles with validated scales and no thesis. The scales were then classified considering the nurses' work processes. Thus, 7 (7.52%) scales were identified in the management area, 11 (11.82%) in teaching and 75 (80.64%) in assistance. They were not identified for research and political participation. Most (69=74.19%) were related to original built scales and only 24 (25.80%) were cross-cultural adaptations of existing scales. As for the validation of the scales, 90 (96.77%) had evidence of validity and reliability as the final result of the psychometric validation. Scales ranged from 11 to 120 items/subitems. Regarding the original language of the scale, 75 were in English, 10 in Korean, 4 in Portuguese, 3 in Japanese and 1 in Spanish. It was concluded that most of the identified scales were in English, were published in Korea (14=15.05%), were original and related to aspects of care. The instruments were structured in the most different ways, with a wide range of items to be evaluated. The types of analysis employed in verifying evidence of validity and reliability were also varied, which demonstrates that there is no possibility of a consensus since each instrument requires its own analytical tests.
This study aimed to map validated scales to measure the competence of nurses in the world literature. A Scope Review was carried out, according to the methodology of the Joana Briggs Institute – JBI, and according to the steps proposed in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic re-views and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Re-views (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. The complete search strategy was performed in the following databases: BVS, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Psycinfo, Embase, Science Direct, JBI, Theses Canada, DART-E, BDTD, CAPES, CIBERTESYS and RCAAP. There was no language restriction, year of publication or origin. Article selection and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently. Original articles or literature reviews that explored scales validated by psychometry to measure the unidimensional and/or multidimensional competence of nurses and male nurses were included. As a result, 4,175 articles and 269 theses were identified in the aforementioned databases. After reading, duplicate and non-relevant studies were excluded, leaving a sample of 93 articles with validated scales and no thesis. The scales were then classified considering the nurses' work processes. Thus, 7 (7.52%) scales were identified in the management area, 11 (11.82%) in teaching and 75 (80.64%) in assistance. They were not identified for research and political participation. Most (69=74.19%) were related to original built scales and only 24 (25.80%) were cross-cultural adaptations of existing scales. As for the validation of the scales, 90 (96.77%) had evidence of validity and reliability as the final result of the psychometric validation. Scales ranged from 11 to 120 items/subitems. Regarding the original language of the scale, 75 were in English, 10 in Korean, 4 in Portuguese, 3 in Japanese and 1 in Spanish. It was concluded that most of the identified scales were in English, were published in Korea (14=15.05%), were original and related to aspects of care. The instruments were structured in the most different ways, with a wide range of items to be evaluated. The types of analysis employed in verifying evidence of validity and reliability were also varied, which demonstrates that there is no possibility of a consensus since each instrument requires its own analytical tests.