If you are experiencing problems downloading PDF or HTML fulltext, our helpdesk recommend clearing your browser cache and trying again. If you need help in clearing your cache, please click here . Still need help? Email help@ingentaconnect.com

Multicentre study of validity and interrater reliability of the modified Nursing Care Recording System (NCR11) for assessment of workload in the ICU

$48.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Download / Buy Article:

Abstract:

Background: 

Reliable assessment of nursing workload is necessary for the quantitative approach to staffing of intensive care units. The Nursing Care Recording System (NCR11) scores both the nursing contribution to patient care and those related to medical procedures. The purpose of the present work was to compare NCR11 scoring with the Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) and Nine Equivalents of Nurse Manpower use Score (NEMS) and to examine the interrater reliability of NCR11 scoring. Methods: 

Bias and precision of workload scores (NCR11 vs. TISS or NEMS) were assessed for 6126 consecutive admissions (23910 ICU-days) at three intensive care units. Inter-rater reliability was analyzed by having nurses at nine ICUs score workload using NCR11 for three dummy intensive care patient cases presented over a 3-year period. Variability in scoring was analyzed using the coefficient of variation. Results: 

Agreement between NCR11 and TISS or NEMS was poor and limits of agreement were wide. Linear relationships between NCR11 and TISS or NEMS scores differed between units. Variability in NCR11 scoring decreased significantly from 10.4% to 5.9% between dummy cases 1 and 2 and remained low for patient case 3. Conclusion: 

The NCR11 does not measure the same elements of workload in the ICU as do TISS and NEMS. Inter-rater reliability with NCR11 is good, showing little variation in scoring between nurses.

Keywords: NEMS; Nursing workload; TISS; nursing manpower

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0001-5172.2004.00397.x

Affiliations: 1: Department of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital, Linköping, 2: Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Norrköping Hospital, Norrköping, 3: Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Ryhovssjukhuset, Jönköping, and 4: Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, County Hospital, Gävle, Sweden

Publication date: July 1, 2004

Related content

Tools

Favourites

Share Content

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more