[风险的护理诊断。成本效益分析]
[Nursing diagnosis of risks. Analysis of cost effectiveness].
作者信息
Vázquez Sánchez M A, Bueno Ferrán M, Casals Sánchez J L, García Cabello J M
机构信息
Distrito Sanitario Málaga-Oeste.
出版信息
Rev Enferm. 1998 May;21(237):26-32.
BACKGROUND
Today, there is a discussion on the importance of the utilization of the nursing diagnosis: This makes convenient to evaluate the principal two existing methodological alternatives, that they are: 1) the problems identification, 2) the diagnoses statement of the NANDA within process nursing. The study is centered on the risk diagnoses.
OBJECT
- To know which the two work methodologies is more effective. 2) To know if exist economic differences.
METHODS
It is accomplished a cohorts study, in a population of user included in Program of Handicapped. These were studied during a year.
RESULTS
In the group of patients without diagnoses the incidence rate was of 0.64 conversions/person-year), in the group with diagnoses was of 0.22 (p < 0.001). The mean of visits after that the is made real, in the group with diagnoses was of 0.35, in the group without diagnoses of 1.69 (p = 0.012).
DISCUSSION
The analysis cost-efficiency of the two work methodologies is clearly more favorable for the methodology than states nursing diagnosis of the taxonomy of the NANDA.
背景
如今，关于护理诊断应用的重要性存在讨论：这便于评估现有的两种主要方法，即：1）问题识别，2）护理过程中北美护理诊断协会（NANDA）的诊断陈述。本研究聚焦于风险诊断。
目的
1）了解两种工作方法哪种更有效。2）了解是否存在经济差异。
方法
在纳入残疾项目的用户群体中进行队列研究。对这些用户进行了为期一年的研究。
结果
在无诊断组中，发病率为0.64（转换数/人年），在有诊断组中为0.22（p<0.001）。确诊后就诊的平均次数，有诊断组为0.35，无诊断组为1.69（p = 0.012）。
讨论
两种工作方法的成本效益分析显然对北美护理诊断协会分类法中陈述护理诊断的方法更为有利。
Zotero 插件