Abstract
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of an existing patient classification instrument in anaesthetic nursing in a new context.
Background:
A patient classification system has to be used by many nurses, so consistency in how it is used is important. Methods: The study was divided into three parts. The first part was intended to measure interreliability using double assessments of 150 anaesthesia cases. In the second part, the anaesthetic nurses carried out the workload and, in part three, content validity was examined using a questionnaire and meetings.
Results:
The result showed good to very good consistency across the board in the nurses' assessments, which also included an overall assessment of the workload (r 0,85). The workload showed the highest mean care level for the indicator preparations/surgical position and the lowest for respiration. The questionnaire replies showed that the nurses were positive about workload, but 43.3 per cent thought that the instrument only described part of their work.
Conclusion:
The instrument was shown to be of use in different contexts, but the reliability and validation process should continue so as to increase reliability. Clarifying the progression between the different care levels for each indicator in the instrument can be a way of increasing its usefulness in different services. In terms of clinical work, the measurement of workload has started a valuable process of reflection on anaesthetic nursing that helps to enable the nurses to show what they do and why.