Conectar
To explore the impact of systems thinking in nursing leadership on healthcare quality, decision-making and resource management.
A systematic review.
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science for studies published in English and Italian up to 2024.
Studies were selected based on predefined eligibility criteria, focusing on nursing leadership integrating systems thinking. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist was used to assess methodological quality. A narrative synthesis was conducted to identify key themes and patterns.
Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Findings suggest that systems thinking enhances resource management, decision-making and patient safety, while also reducing errors and improving staff collaboration. Adopting a systems approach allows nursing leaders to navigate complex healthcare environments effectively. However, variability in study designs and implementation strategies limits the generalizability of findings.
Integrating systems thinking into nursing leadership promotes a proactive, holistic approach to problem-solving, optimising healthcare outcomes. While evidence supports its benefits, further empirical studies are needed to confirm its effectiveness across diverse healthcare settings.
What problem did the study address? The need for structured systems thinking in nursing leadership. What were the main findings? Improved decision-making, resource optimisation and patient safety through systems-oriented leadership. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? Nurse leaders, healthcare administrators and policymakers in diverse healthcare settings.
Although patients and the public were not directly involved, this study has implications for enhancing patient safety and healthcare efficiency.
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is widely endorsed as a cornerstone for high-quality, patient-centered care. However, its integration into daily clinical routines remains inconsistent, particularly in settings where cultural, educational, and organizational challenges persist. Reliable, contextually adapted tools are essential to measure EBP implementation and guide improvement efforts.
This study aimed to validate the Italian versions of the EBP Implementation Scale and its short-form (3-item) version.
A cross-sectional survey design was adopted. Both versions of the EBP Implementation Scale were translated and culturally adapted in accordance with internationally recognized guidelines. Data were gathered from a national sample of 405 nurses through a combination of convenience and snowball sampling. Psychometric assessment encompassed confirmatory and Bayesian factor analyses, evaluation of internal consistency and test–retest reliability, and measurement invariance testing. All analyses were performed in R Studio.
Confirmatory factor analyses confirmed that both versions (long and short) of the scale measure a single underlying construct. The instruments demonstrated high reliability (ω = 0.96 and 0.87 respectively). Measurement invariance across educational groups was partially established, as the partial scalar invariance model demonstrated acceptable fit (CFI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.045), suggesting consistent interpretation of the scale across different levels of EBP training. Latent profile analysis revealed distinct subgroups of EBP implementers, with notable differences in latent means (p < 0.001) associated with previous education in evidence-based practice.
The Italian EBP Implementation Scales are valid and reliable tools for assessing EBP implementation behaviors. They can support education planning, monitor practice changes over time, and inform interventions aimed at enhancing evidence-based care.
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is essential for clinical decision-making, integrating the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and stakeholder values. In Italy, interest in EBP is growing, and a key step in its promotion is adopting tools to assess nurses' beliefs and behaviors toward EBP. While the EBP Beliefs Scale has been translated and validated in multiple languages, it has yet to be adapted for the Italian context.
This study aims to adapt EBP measurement tools for the Italian context and evaluate their psychometric properties.
This study used an observational cross-sectional design. The process of cross-cultural translation, adaptation, and validation was adopted. A panel of experts culturally adapted the Beliefs Scales (long and short version) through the item and scale content validity (I-CVI, S-CVI). To test the psychometric properties, 409 nurses were asked to complete the two scales. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to validate the factor structure within the Italian context. Convergent validity between the long and short versions of the scale was assessed using the correlation coefficient (r), and the reliability was assessed by computing Cronbach's alpha.
The I-CVI and S-CVI for the long and short version ranged from 0.75 to 1.00. The CFA model performed for the long and short version reported a good fit without the need for further refinements. The Cronbach's alpha was higher than 0.80 for both scales. The correlation of 0.615 (p < 0.01) indicated a moderate to strong positive relationship supporting the convergent validity of the short version in relation to the long version.
In time-constrained settings, the short scale should be utilized for efficient assessments and longitudinal tracking of changes. The long version serves as a complementary tool for in-depth analysis, facilitating a deeper understanding of underlying factors and informing targeted interventions to address specific barriers.
FreshRSS 