ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies advances2026
Utilization of nurse-sensitive indicators in nursing practice: A comparative qualitative study in German and U.S. hospitals.
Article in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nurse-sensitive indicators represent data that can be used in a learning health system to systematically generate knowledge, identify opportunities to improve nursing practice and enhance patient care. Aim: To analyze and compare the utilization of nurse-sensitive indicators in nursing practice between selected hospitals from Germany and the U.S. Method: A qualitative study was conducted, comprising 17 semi-structured interviews with 19 nurses carried out from June to September 2025. Purposive sampling was applied, including nine participants from four hospitals in Germany that were part of the Magnet4Europe study, and ten participants from four U.S. Magnet® hospitals. The interview guide followed the cycles of a learning health system. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. The reporting adhered to the standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR). The study was not registered. Results: Three themes and eight subthemes emerged. First, differences were observed in the scope of nurse-sensitive indicators collected, with interviewees from U.S. hospitals reporting a broader range and higher assessed documentation quality. Second, access to and internal structures of working with nurse-sensitive indicators differed between countries. Interviewees from U.S. hospitals described systematic data transparency, clinical roles for data analysis, and structured data discussions across all organizational levels. Interviewees from German hospitals reported sharing data internally with more restricted access, diverse analytical roles, and data discussions mainly within unit teams. All interviewees recognized opportunities to improve nursing care through trends and benchmarking, with U.S. hospitals placing a stronger emphasis on quantitative data and evidence-based practice. Third, interviewees from U.S. hospitals explained standardized evaluation and extensive recognition processes of success, while interviewees from German hospitals reported unstructured or absent evaluation processes and a need to strengthen recognition of achievements. Discussion: A systematic utilization of nurse-sensitive indicators was demonstrated by the interviewees from U.S. hospitals, whereas interviewees from German hospitals reported a high divergence in their utilization, indicating potential to strengthen their use in the future. Further research is needed to identify enabling factors and barriers for integrating nurse-sensitive indicators into nursing practice.
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.