Journal of Clinical Nursing 

About: Journal of Clinical Nursing is an academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Health care & Medicine. It has an ISSN identifier of 0962-1067. Over the lifetime, 8808 publications have been published receiving 258316 citations. The journal is also known as: JCN.

Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales.

Abstract: Aims and objectives. This review aims to explore the research available relating to three commonly used pain rating scales, the Visual Analogue Scale, the Verbal Rating Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale. The review provides information needed to understand the main properties of the scales. Background. Data generated from pain-rating scales can be easily misunderstood. This review can help clinicians to understand the main features of these tools and thus use them effectively. Method. A MedLine review via PubMed was carried out with no restriction of age of papers retrieved. Papers were examined for methodological soundness before being included. The search terms initially included pain rating scales, pain measurement, Visual Analogue Scale, VAS, Verbal Rating Scale, VRS, Numerical/numeric Rating Scale, NRS. The reference lists of retrieved articles were used to generate more papers and search terms. Only English Language papers were examined. Conclusions. All three pain-rating scales are valid, reliable and appropriate for use in clinical practice, although the Visual Analogue Scale has more practical difficulties than the Verbal Rating Scale or the Numerical Rating Scale. For general purposes the Numerical Rating Scale has good sensitivity and generates data that can be statistically analysed for audit purposes. Patients who seek a sensitive pain-rating scale would probably choose this one. For simplicity patients prefer the Verbal Rating Scale, but it lacks sensitivity and the data it produces can be misunderstood. Relevance to clinical practice. In order to use pain-rating scales well clinicians need to appreciate the potential for error within the tools, and the potential they have to provide the required information. Interpretation of the data from a pain-rating scale is not as straightforward as it might first appear.

Essential elements of questionnaire design and development.

Abstract: Aims The aims of this paper were (1) to raise awareness of the issues in questionnaire development and subsequent psychometric evaluation, and (2) to provide strategies to enable nurse researchers to design and develop their own measure and evaluate the quality of existing nursing measures. Background The number of questionnaires developed by nurses has increased in recent years. While the rigour applied to the questionnaire development process may be improving, we know that nurses are still not generally adept at the psychometric evaluation of new measures. This paper explores the process by which a reliable and valid questionnaire can be developed. Methods We critically evaluate the theoretical and methodological issues associated with questionnaire design and development and present a series of heuristic decision-making strategies at each stage of such development. The range of available scales is presented and we discuss strategies to enable item generation and development. The importance of stating a priori the number of factors expected in a prototypic measure is emphasized. Issues of reliability and validity are explored using item analysis and exploratory factor analysis and illustrated using examples from recent nursing research literature. Conclusion Questionnaire design and development must be supported by a logical, systematic and structured approach. To aid this process we present a framework that supports this and suggest strategies to demonstrate the reliability and validity of the new and developing measure. Relevance to clinical practice In developing the evidence base of nursing practice using this method of data collection, it is vital that questionnaire design incorporates preplanned methods to establish reliability and validity. Failure to develop a questionnaire sufficiently may lead to difficulty interpreting results, and this may impact upon clinical or educational practice. This paper presents a critical evaluation of the questionnaire design and development process and demonstrates good practice at each stage of this process.

Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions

Abstract: A number of hierarchies of evidence have been developed to enable different research methods to be ranked according to the validity of their findings. However, most have focused on evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions. When the evaluation of healthcare addresses its appropriateness or feasibility, then existing hierarchies are inadequate. This paper reports the development of a hierarchy for ranking of evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. The aims of this hierarchy are twofold. Firstly, it is to provide a means by which the evidence from a range of methodologically different types of research can be graded. Secondly, it is to provide a logical framework that can be used during the development of systematic review protocols to help determine the study designs which can contribute valid evidence when the evaluation extends beyond effectiveness. The proposed hierarchy was developed based on a review of literature, investigation of existing hierarchies and examination of the strengths and limitations of different research methods. The proposed hierarchy of evidence focuses on three dimensions of the evaluation: effectiveness, appropriateness and feasibility. Research that can contribute valid evidence to each is suggested. To address the varying strengths of different research designs, four levels of evidence are proposed: excellent, good, fair and poor. The strength of the proposed hierarchy is that it acknowledges the valid contribution of evidence generated by a range of different types of research. However, hierarchies only provide a guide to the strength of the available evidence and other issues such as the quality of research also have an important influence.

The pandemic paradox: The consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence.

Abstract: COVID-19 (the new strain of coronavirus) has been declared a global pandemic. Measures announced over recent weeks to tackle it have seen people's day-to-day life drastically altered. These changes are essential to beat coronavirus and protect health systems (UK Home Office 2020). However, there are unintended, negative consequences. As the virus continues to spread across the world, it brings with it multiple new stresses, including physical and psychological health risks, isolation and loneliness, the closure of many schools and businesses, economic vulnerability and job losses. Through all of that, children (and their mothers) are particularly vulnerable (End Violence against Children, 2020) to the risk of domestic violence. Domestic violence refers to a range of violations that happen within a domestic space. It is a broad term that encompasses intimate partner violence (IPV), a form of abuse that is perpetrated by a current or ex-partner.

Beyond person-centred care: a new vision for gerontological nursing.

Abstract: Currently considerable emphasis is placed on the promotion of person-centred care, which has become a watchword for good practice. This paper takes a constructively critical look at some of the assumptions underpinning person-centredness, and suggests that a relationship-centred approach to care might be more appropriate. A framework describing the potential dimensions of relationship-centred care is provided, and implications for further development are considered.