• 간호행정학회지
• /
• 제1권2호
• /
• pp.338-348
• /
• 1995

We need to continuously evaluate for nursing quality and the outcome to reflect nursing, to repair and improve of nursing. The first problem for nursing quality improvement is development of evaluation tool for the quality of nursing care. We need a system for quality assurance evaluation that is, development and framework of evaluation tool for nursing care quality. The purpose of this study was attempted to develop an evaluation tool for the quality of nursing care in musculoskeletal disorder patients. The approach method of nursing quality for the development of the tool in this study was process evaluation framework. The study were devided dvelopment process and reliability, validity verification process. The subjects of development process of this tool are three nursing export groups, and the subject of reliability, validity verification process are 20 samples of two university hospital in seoul, who were within discharge 3 months after admission treatment in musculo-skeletal disorder. Data for this study was collected from March 10 to April 13, 1995. The development process of the tool were as follows : 1. Make preliminary list of the tool by focal group were constituted 12 clinical nurses. 2. Modify and add preliminary list by 4 nursing expert panel. 3. Calculate content validity of the tool by 25 nursing expert panel of judge. 4. Verify reliability and validity of the tool. 5. Finalize an evaluation tool for the quality of the nursing care in musculo-skeletal disorder. The results of this study were as follows : 1) Development an evaluation tool for the quality of nursing care in musculo-skeletal disorder. (1) The evalution tool of this study was developed 5 standards, 33 criterias and 133 indicators. (2) 5 standards were divided according to Nursing Process. from standard 1 to standard 5, involved criterias were each 6(18%), 3(9%), 3(9%), 15(46%), 6(18%). 2) Verify reliability and validity of the tool. (1) Score of adequate degree for content validity of 33 criterias and 133 indicators were every average 2.82. (2) Inter-rater reliabilities(consentaneity score) of the tool by pearson correlation coefficient between three raters were : r=.7506, r=.8934, r=.6695. and Inter-rater reliabilities by single-facet crossed design were : r=.7464. (3) The alpha coefficient relating to internal consistency was .8524 over all 30 items of 33 criterias of developed tool. (4) Score of the quality of nursing care following to generaal characteristics of this study subjects were stastically significant differences according to educational level (F=2.93, p=.029)and diagnosing classification (F=2.50, p=.042). Through this study, I'm sure that the developed tool for the quality of patient care in musculo-skeletal disorder will show the way of more improvement of the quality of nursing care and effective nursing interventions.

• 대한족부족관절학회지
• /
• 제18권4호
• /
• pp.165-172
• /
• 2014

Purpose: We evaluated the correlation of postoperative clinical outcomes and radiologic findings using computed tomography and simple X-ray in intra-articular calcaneal fractures. Materials and Methods: The current study is based on 41 feet, 38 patients with displaced intra-articular fracture who underwent surgical treatment with at least one year of follow-up. Evaluation of clinical outcome included American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and subjective satisfaction. A simple X-ray was used in evaluation of preoperative and postoperative Gissane angle, B${\ddot{O}}$hler angle, and calcaneal fracture width. Computed tomography scan was performed for evaluation of preoperative and postoperative articular step-off and articular gap in all cases. Finally, we evaluated the correlation of the postoperative clinical outcomes and radiologic findings based on the measurement. Results: The average postoperative AOFAS score and VAS score was $84.1{\pm}8.5$ and $2.2{\pm}2.2$. Subjective satisfaction was excellent in 15 cases, good in 19 cases, and fair in seven cases. The average B${\ddot{O}}$hler angle was restored from $11.1^{\circ}$ to $24.7^{\circ}$(p<0.05), Gissane angle was changed from $121.0^{\circ}$ to $119.0^{\circ}$ (p>0.05), and the average width was restored from 45.8 to 35.0 mm (p<0.05). The average articular step-off and gap were decreased from 6.3 to 2.0 mm and from 11.1 to 4.6 mm, respectively (p<0.05). No significant correlations were observed between the clinical outcome and Gissane angle, B${\ddot{O}}$hler angle, and width, and there was no significant correlation between the clinical outcome and Sanders classification. However, postoperative articular step-off showed correlation with VAS and AOFAS score and articular gap showed correlation with VAS score. Conclusion: The clinical outcome did not show correlation with B${\ddot{O}}$hler angle and Gissane angle but did show correlation with anatomical reduction of the posterior facet joint.