AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LEVELS OF ACUITY PATIENTS IN INPATIENT WARDS AND THE QUALITY OF NURSING CARE: DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between the acuity levels of patients in inpatient wards and the quality of nursing care. Methods: This study is descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional in nature. Data were collected using the “Nurse-Patient Introduction Form,” the “Perroca Patient Classification Instrument-Turkish Form-Expanded,” and the “Quality Nursing Care Scale-Turkish.” Without using any sampling method, 120 nurses who volunteered to participate in the study and a total of 506 patients cared for by these nurses on the data collection day were included in the study. It was conducted between February 1 and March 1, 2025. Descriptive statistics were used in data analysis, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was applied to determine the differences between the groups. Results: The average age of the nurses participating in the study was 34.82 years, with an average professional experience of 12.24 years; the average age of the patients was 59.38 years, and the average length of stay was 5.37 days. It was determined that most patients in the wards were at Type 2 acuity level and that nursing care requirements differed according to care areas. A statistically significant difference was found between patient acuity levels and quality nursing care only in the nursing dimension; no significant difference was found in the physical environment and patient outcomes dimensions. Conclusion: This study found that patients in inpatient wards differed in their acuity levels; however, the perceived quality of care provided by nurses did not show a significant change based on patients' acuity levels, except for the physical environment sub-dimension.

Keywords

• Patient classification
• acuity level
• quality nursing care

Supporting Institution

There is no supporting organization

Ethical Statement

Prior to the research, permission was obtained from the Istanbul Okan University Ethics Committee (E.206695) and institutional approval was obtained from the hospital where the study was conducted

Thanks

We would like to thank all the nurses who contributed to this study.

YATAN HASTA SERVİSLERİNDEKİ HASTALARIN BAĞIMLILIK DÜZEYLERİ İLE KALİTELİ HEMŞİRELİK BAKIMI ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN İNCELENMESİ:TANIMLAYICI ARAŞTIRMA

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı yatan hasta servislerindeki hastaların bağımlılık düzeyleri ile kaliteli hemşirelik bakımı arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu araştırma, tanımlayıcı, ilişki arayıcı ve kesitsel tipte bir çalışmadır. Araştırmada veriler toplanmasında “Hemşire-Hasta Tanıtım Formu”, “Perroca Hasta Sınıflandırma Ölçeği-Geliştirilmiş Türkçe Formu” ve “Kaliteli Hemşirelik Bakım Ölçeği” kullanıldı. Herhangi bir örnekleme yöntemi kullanılmadan, araştırmaya katılmaya gönüllü 120 hemşire ile veri toplama gününde bu hemşirelerin bakım verdiği toplam 506 hasta araştırma kapsamına dahil edildi. 1 Şubat – 1 Mart 2025 tarihleri arasında yürütüldü. Veri analizinde tanımlayıcı istatistikler; gruplar arasındaki farkları belirlemek amacıyla ise Kruskal-Wallis H testi uygulandı. Bulgular: Çalışmaya katılan hemşirelerin yaş ortalaması 34,82 yıl, mesleki deneyim süresi ortalaması 12,24 yıl; hastaların yaş ortalaması 59,38 yıl ve ortalama yatış süresi 5,37 gün olarak belirlendi. Servislerde hastaların en çok Tip 2 bağımlılık düzeyinde yer aldığı saptandı ve hemşirelik bakım gereksinimlerinin bakım alanlarına göre farklılık gösterdiği belirlendi. Hasta bağımlılık düzeyleri ile kaliteli hemşirelik bakımı arasında yalnızca hemşirelik boyutunda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulundu, fiziksel çevre ve hasta çıktıları boyutlarında ise anlamlı farklılık saptanmadı. Sonuç: Bu çalışma sonucunda, yatan hasta servislerinde hastaların bağımlılık düzeylerinin farklılık gösterdiği; ancak hemşireler tarafından sunulan bakımın kalite algısının fiziksel çevre alt boyutu dışında hastaların bağımlılık düzeyine göre anlamlı bir değişiklik göstermediği bulundu.

Keywords

• Hasta sınıflandırma
• bağımlılık düzeyi
• kaliteli hemşirelik bakımı

Supporting Institution

Destekleyen kuruluş bulunmamaktadır.

Ethical Statement

Araştırma öncesinde, İstanbul Okan Üniversitesi Etik Kurulu'ndan izin alınmış (E.206695) ve çalışmanın yürütüldüğü hastaneden kurumsal onay alınmıştır

Thanks

Çalışmaya katkı sağlayan tüm hemşirelere teşekkür ederiz.

References

1. International Council of Nurses. ICN says WHO’s World Health Day theme of the right of everyone to have access to quality health services requires substantial investment. ICN; 2024 Apr 5.
2. Lasater KB, Aiken LH, Douglas C, Windsor C, Yates P, Smith HL, McHugh MD. Minimum nurse staffing policy intervention in Queensland, Australia improved nurse well-being and patient safety: a quasi-experimental intervention study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2025;171:105178. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105178
3. Muir KJ, Sliwinski K, Pogue CA, Golinelli D, Petto A, Lasater KB, McHugh MD. Lower burnout among hospital nurses in California attributed to better nurse staffing ratios. Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2025;26(3):219-226. doi:10.1177/15271544251317506
4. Turi E, Lasater KB, Muir KJ. Nurse staffing and patient outcomes: a call to action for chronic wound care policy reform. Adv Wound Care. 2025;21621918251400770.
5. Simonetti M, Cerón C, Galiano A, Lake ET, Aiken LH. Hospital work environment, nurse staffing, and missed care in Chile: a cross-sectional observational study. J Clin Nurs. 2022;31(17-18):2518-2529. doi:10.1111/jocn.16068
6. Li Y, Aiken LH, Becker ER, Razmpour O, Landerfelt P, Kang YJ, Cimiotti JP. The effect of registered nurse staffing and skill mix on length of stay and hospital costs. Nurs Outlook. 2025;73(2):102356. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2025.102356
7. Türkmen E. The effect of nurse staffing on patient and nurse outcomes: workforce planning in inpatient healthcare institutions. Hacettepe Univ Fac Nurs J. 2015;2(3):69-80.
8. Harper K, McCully C. Acuity systems dialogue and patient classification systems essentials. Nurs Adm Q. 2007;31(4):284-299. doi:10.1097/01.NAQ.0000290426.41690.cb

9. American Nurses Association. Defining staffing: workforce management, patient classification and acuity systems, the request for proposal process. American Nurses Association; 2017.
10. L, Eşer İ, Dijkstra A. Validity and reliability of the Care Dependency Scale in elderly individuals. Turk J Geriatr. 2010;13(suppl):71.
11. Yıldırım D. Development of a patient classification tool. Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2003;13(51):115-132.
12. Koç S, Bardak A. A case study in Turkey: importance of appropriate nurse staffing plans and ratios in Turkish private hospitals (Acibadem Healthcare Group). Asian J Nurs Educ Res. 2013;4(2):245-254.
13. Fagerström L, Rainio AK, Rauhala A, Nojonen K. Validation of a new method for patient classification: the Oulu patient classification. J Adv Nurs. 2000;31(2):481-490. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01277.x
14. Ko Y, Park B, Lee H, Kim D. Developing and testing a Korean patient classification system for general wards based on nursing intensity. Nurs Open. 2021;8(4):1870-1878. doi:10.1002/nop2.845
15. Ayan G, Kuşcu Karatepe H, Subaşı B, Dirican Ü, Türkmen E. Psychometric evaluation of the Turkish adapted form of the Perroca patient classification scale in a multi-hospital sample. In: Proceedings of the 5th National Nursing Management Congress; 2025:84. Istanbul, Turkey.
16. Yang J, Liu F, Yang C, Wei J, Ma Y, Xu L, Wang J. Application of Donabedian’s three-dimensional model in outpatient care quality: a scoping review. J Nurs Manag. 2025;2025:6893336. doi:10.1155/jonm/6893336
17. Gülen D, Zaybak A. The perception of nursing care quality by patients and nurses: a descriptive study. Turkiye Klin J Nurs Sci. 2023;15(1):108-117.
18. Durgun H, Duman S, Şahin K. Examination of patient dependency levels and perceptions of nursing care among patients hospitalized in surgical and internal medicine units. J Nursology. 2022;25(1):31-35.
19. Çevik K, Eşer İ. The effect of dependency levels of patients hospitalized in a neurosurgery clinic on their perceptions of nursing care quality. Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2014;22(2):76-83.
20. Perroca MG, Gaidzinski RR. Patient classification system: construction and validation of an instrument. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 1998;32(2):153-168. doi:10.1590/S0080-62341998000200009
21. Liu Y, Aungsuroch Y, Gunawan J, Sha L, Shi T. Development and psychometric evaluation of a quality nursing care scale from nurses’ perspective. Nurs Open. 2021;8:1741-1754. doi:10.1002/nop2.816
22. Karaca A, Kaya L, Kaya G, Harmancı Seren AK. Psychometric properties of the Quality Nursing Care Scale–Turkish version: a methodological study. BMC Nurs. 2022;21(1):370. doi:10.1186/s12912-022-01153-0
23. Akcan V, Aylaz R. Determination of caregiver burden among caregivers of patients receiving palliative care: a descriptive cross-sectional study. Turkiye Klin J Nurs Sci. 2025;17(3):741-751.
24. Ayan G, Türkmen E, Uğur E, Akbal E, Sarıtaş B, Erbay Ç, Hayta Ö. Determination of nursing care times based on the Perroca patient classification instrument in the inpatient oncology unit: a mixed-method study. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2024;40(2):151608.
25. Lopetegui M, Yen PY, Lai A, Jeffries J, Embi P, Payne P. Time-motion studies in health care: what are we talking about? J Biomed Inform. 2014;49:292-299.
26. Michel O, Garcia Manjon AJ, Pasquier J, Ortoleva Bucher C. How do nurses spend their time? A time and motion analysis of nursing activities in an internal medicine unit. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(11):4459-4470. doi:10.1111/jan.14935
27. Hendrich A, Chow MP, Skierczynski BA, Lu Z. A 36-hospital time and motion study: how do medical-surgical nurses spend their time? Perm J. 2008;12(3):25-34. doi:10.7812/tpp/08-021
28. Silva JBD, Póvoa VCO, Lima MHDM, Oliveira HC, Padilha KG, Secoli SR. Nursing workload in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a cohort study. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2015;49:93-100. doi:10.1590/S0080-623420150000700014
29. Al-Dweik G, Ahmad M. The effect of patients’ acuity level on nurses’ shift assignment in Jordan: a qualitative approach. J Nurs Meas. 2020;28(2):404-418.