ArticleJournal of nursing management2021
Improving the quality of nursing care in Austria: 10 years of success.
Article in Journal of nursing management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- International Competencies of Advanced Practice Nurses in Critical Care: An Integrative Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Development and Validation of an Indicator System for Evaluating Clinical Nursing Process Quality Using Mobile Nursing Information Systems.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Application of Donabedian Three-Dimensional Model in Outpatient Care Quality: A Scoping Review.Journal of nursing management · 2025Article
- Identifying nursing sensitive indicators from electronic health records in acute cardiac care-Towards intelligent automated assessment of care quality.Journal of nursing management · 2022Article
- Improving the quality of nursing care in Austria: 10 years of success.Journal of nursing management · 2021Article
- Evidence Synthesis for the Development of National Nursing-Sensitive Indicators in Malaysia: A Literature Review and Stakeholder Engagement Approach.SAGE open nursingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsWe provide more updated and comprehensive insights, including descriptions of changes that have taken place in the quality of pressure injury care provided in hospitals over a 10-year period.
backgroundVarious nursing quality measurements do not present a comprehensive view on nursing-sensitive quality indicators or place a focus on one specific care problem.
methodsIt is a repeated cross-sectional multicentre study conducted annually on 1 day including comprehensive data regarding nursing-sensitive care problems and quality indicators on the structure, process and outcome levels.
resultsThe prevalence of pressure injuries decreased over the years from 4.4% to 2.9%, and the frequency of interventions increased.
conclusionThe Nursing Quality Measurement 2.0 initiative shows considerable improvements over a 10-year period. Therefore, the maintenance of such nursing databases should be treated as a prerequisite to providing high-quality nursing care and safe nursing practice. One main benefit of creating and maintaining such databases is that allow users to screen for improvements, for example in pressure injury care. These observations can be used to develop marketing strategies and/or to empower and engage nursing staff. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Participation in such quality measurements allows the comparison of data collected in wards and institutions in many different countries, enabling them to set appropriate benchmarks. Furthermore, the results can be compared over a period of time, highlighting systematic changes, trends or improvements (e.g., due to implemented innovations).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.