Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Nurs. 2017 Feb;26(3-4):379-387. doi: 10.1111/jocn.13387. Epub 2016 Oct 25.

Advanced Nursing Process quality: Comparing the International Classification for Nursing Practice (ICNP) with the NANDA-International (NANDA-I) and Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC).

Author information

1
Graduate Program in Nursing at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul and Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre and Grupo de Estudo e Pesquisa em Enfermagem no Cuidado ao Adulto e Idoso (GEPECADI), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
2
Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
3
Nurse of Instituto Nacional do Câncer (HC III), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
4
Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
5
Nursing Projects, Research and Innovation (Switzerland) & Hanze University, Groningen, the Netherlands.

Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

To assess the quality of the advanced nursing process in nursing documentation in two hospitals.

BACKGROUND:

Various standardised terminologies are employed by nurses worldwide, whether for teaching, research or patient care. These systems can improve the quality of nursing records, enable care continuity, consistency in written communication and enhance safety for patients and providers alike.

DESIGN:

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS:

A total of 138 records from two facilities (69 records from each facility) were analysed, one using the NANDA-International and Nursing Interventions Classification terminology (Centre 1) and one the International Classification for Nursing Practice (Centre 2), by means of the Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes instrument. Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes scores range from 0-58 points. Nursing records were dated 2012-2013 for Centre 1 and 2010-2011 for Centre 2.

RESULTS:

Centre 1 had a Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes score of 35·46 (±6·45), whereas Centre 2 had a Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes score of 31·72 (±4·62) (p < 0·001). Centre 2 had higher scores in the 'Nursing Diagnoses as Process' dimension, whereas in the 'Nursing Diagnoses as Product', 'Nursing Interventions' and 'Nursing Outcomes' dimensions, Centre 1 exhibited superior performance; acceptable reliability values were obtained for both centres, except for the 'Nursing Interventions' domain in Centre 1 and the 'Nursing Diagnoses as Process' and 'Nursing Diagnoses as Product' domains in Centre 2.

CONCLUSION:

The quality of nursing documentation was superior at Centre 1, although both facilities demonstrated moderate scores considering the maximum potential score of 58 points. Reliability analyses showed satisfactory results for both standardised terminologies.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE:

Nursing leaders should use a validated instrument to investigate the quality of nursing records after implementation of standardised terminologies.

KEYWORDS:

International Classification for Nursing Practice; NANDA-International; Nursing Interventions Classification; Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes instrument; classification; nursing process; nursing records

PMID:
27192041
DOI:
10.1111/jocn.13387
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center