Müller-Staub Maria, Lavin Mary Ann, Needham Ian, van Achterberg Theo
Saint Louis University School of Nursing, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
J Adv Nurs. 2006 Dec;56(5):514-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.04012.x.
This paper reports a systematic review on the outcomes of nursing diagnostics. Specifically, it examines effects on documentation of assessment quality; frequency, accuracy and completeness of nursing diagnoses; and on coherence between nursing diagnoses, interventions and outcomes.
Escalating healthcare costs demand the measurement of nursing's contribution to care. Use of standardized terminologies facilitates this measurement. Although several studies have evaluated nursing diagnosis documentation and their relationship with interventions and outcomes, a systematic review has not been carried out.
A Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane Database search (1982-2004) was conducted and enhanced by the addition of primary source and conference proceeding articles. Inclusion criteria were established and applied. Thirty-six articles were selected and subjected to thematic content analysis; each study was then assessed, and a level of evidence and grades of recommendations assigned.
Nursing diagnosis use improved the quality of documented patient assessments (n = 14 studies), identification of commonly occurring diagnoses within similar settings (n = 10), and coherence among nursing diagnoses, interventions, and outcomes (n = 8). Four studies employed a continuing education intervention and found statistically significant improvements in the documentation of diagnoses, interventions and outcomes. However, limitations in diagnostic accuracy, reporting of signs/symptoms, and aetiology were also reported (14 studies). One meta-analysis of eight trials including 1497 patients showed no evidence that standardized electronic documentation of nursing diagnosis and related interventions led to better nursing outcomes.
Despite variable results, the trend indicated that nursing diagnostics improved assessment documentation, the quality of interventions reported, and outcomes attained. The study reveals deficits in reporting of signs/symptoms and aetiology. Consequently, staff educational measures to enhance diagnostic accuracy are recommended. The relationships among diagnoses, interventions and outcomes require further evaluation. Studies are needed to determine the relationship between the quality of documentation and practice.
本文报告一项关于护理诊断结果的系统评价。具体而言,它考察了对评估质量记录的影响;护理诊断的频率、准确性和完整性;以及护理诊断、干预措施和结果之间的一致性。
不断攀升的医疗保健成本要求衡量护理对护理工作的贡献。使用标准化术语有助于进行这种衡量。尽管已有多项研究评估了护理诊断记录及其与干预措施和结果的关系,但尚未进行系统评价。
对Medline、CINAHL和Cochrane数据库进行了检索(1982 - 2004年),并通过补充原始资料和会议论文进行了扩充。制定并应用了纳入标准。选择了36篇文章并进行主题内容分析;然后对每项研究进行评估,并确定证据水平和推荐等级。
护理诊断的使用提高了记录的患者评估质量(14项研究),在相似环境中识别常见诊断的能力(10项研究),以及护理诊断、干预措施和结果之间的一致性(8项研究)。4项研究采用了继续教育干预措施,发现诊断、干预措施和结果的记录有统计学上的显著改善。然而,也报告了诊断准确性、体征/症状报告和病因方面的局限性(14项研究)。一项对八项试验(包括1497名患者)的荟萃分析表明,没有证据表明护理诊断和相关干预措施的标准化电子记录能带来更好的护理结果。
尽管结果存在差异,但趋势表明护理诊断改善了评估记录、所报告干预措施的质量以及所取得的结果。该研究揭示了体征/症状和病因报告方面的不足。因此,建议采取员工教育措施以提高诊断准确性。诊断、干预措施和结果之间的关系需要进一步评估。需要开展研究以确定记录质量与实践之间的关系。