Premium
心血管疾病患者方面执业护士主导型护理相关结果:系统综述和荟萃分析
Author(s) -
Smigorowsky Marcie J.,
Sebastianski Meghan,
Sean McMurtry Michael,
Tsuyuki Ross T.,
Norris Colleen M.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of advanced nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.948
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1365-2648
pISSN - 0309-2402
DOI - 10.1111/jan.14229
Subject(s) - medicine , cinahl , medline , meta analysis , randomized controlled trial , cochrane library , systematic review , family medicine , data extraction , grading (engineering) , health care , nursing , psychological intervention , political science , law , civil engineering , economic growth , economics , engineering
Aim To assess randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of nurse practitioner‐led cardiovascular care. Background Systematic review of nurse practitioner–led care in patients with cardiovascular disease has not been completed. Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Data sources The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and ProQuest were systematically searched for studies published between January 2007 ‐ June 2017. Review Methods Cochrane methodology was used for risk of bias, data extraction and meta‐analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results Out of 605 articles, five articles met the inclusion criteria. There was no statistical difference between nurse practitioner‐led care and usual care for 30‐day readmissions, health‐related quality of life and length of stay. A 12% reduction in Framingham risk score was identified. Conclusion There are a few randomized control trials assessing nurse practitioner‐led cardiovascular care. Impact Low to moderate quality evidence was identified with no statistically significant associated outcomes of care. Nurse practitioner roles need to be supported to conduct and publish high‐quality research.