Nursing diagnosis domains utilized in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in Ibadan, Nigeria.

P O Adejumo, V F Akolade
{"title":"Nursing diagnosis domains utilized in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in Ibadan, Nigeria.","authors":"P O Adejumo,&nbsp;V F Akolade","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nursing process has been identified as a tool for effective nursing practice. However, current evidence reveals either poor implementation or outright none utilization even in the 21st century. One of the reasons is lack of understanding of the process based on lack of patient assessment by the nurses and inaccurate nursing diagnostic statements. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which nursing assessment was performed by the nurses and to identify the nursing diagnostic domains being frequently utilized in the study setting.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>This was a retrospective study conducted in the burn and cardiothoracic intensive care unit of the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan. A total of-230 nursing process booklets of patients were conveniently sampled which included 80 and 150 nursing process booklet of patients with head and burn injury respectively. Descriptive statistics was used to compute the results of the study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that, initial nursing assessment was done for all the patients; hence first set of nursing diagnoses were identified. Time lapsed assessment with accompanying changes in nursing diagnoses was done for only 28% and 32.5% of the patients with burns and head injury respectively. The most frequently used nursing diagnoses were from domain 11- safety/protection (35.7%). The second category include nursing diagnosis domain 4--Activity/ est\" (28.6%), 14% were domain 2- utrition, while the remaining 21% (7% each) were the domains 3, 5 and 12- Elimination, cognitive and perceptual patterns and safety/protection respectively. There were no nursing diagnoses from domains 1: health promotion, domain 6: self perception, domain 7: role relationships, domain 8: sexuality, domain 9: coping/stress tolerance, domain 10: life principles and domain 13:. growth and development. CCONCLUSION Intensified.effort through continuing nursing education or seminars should be instituted to educate nurses on the importance of quality assessment in effective clinical judgment and utilizing nursing diagnosis fully in all domains with adequate 'documentation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7616,"journal":{"name":"African journal of medicine and medical sciences","volume":"43 2","pages":"167-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African journal of medicine and medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Nursing process has been identified as a tool for effective nursing practice. However, current evidence reveals either poor implementation or outright none utilization even in the 21st century. One of the reasons is lack of understanding of the process based on lack of patient assessment by the nurses and inaccurate nursing diagnostic statements. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which nursing assessment was performed by the nurses and to identify the nursing diagnostic domains being frequently utilized in the study setting.

Methodology: This was a retrospective study conducted in the burn and cardiothoracic intensive care unit of the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan. A total of-230 nursing process booklets of patients were conveniently sampled which included 80 and 150 nursing process booklet of patients with head and burn injury respectively. Descriptive statistics was used to compute the results of the study.

Results: The study revealed that, initial nursing assessment was done for all the patients; hence first set of nursing diagnoses were identified. Time lapsed assessment with accompanying changes in nursing diagnoses was done for only 28% and 32.5% of the patients with burns and head injury respectively. The most frequently used nursing diagnoses were from domain 11- safety/protection (35.7%). The second category include nursing diagnosis domain 4--Activity/ est" (28.6%), 14% were domain 2- utrition, while the remaining 21% (7% each) were the domains 3, 5 and 12- Elimination, cognitive and perceptual patterns and safety/protection respectively. There were no nursing diagnoses from domains 1: health promotion, domain 6: self perception, domain 7: role relationships, domain 8: sexuality, domain 9: coping/stress tolerance, domain 10: life principles and domain 13:. growth and development. CCONCLUSION Intensified.effort through continuing nursing education or seminars should be instituted to educate nurses on the importance of quality assessment in effective clinical judgment and utilizing nursing diagnosis fully in all domains with adequate 'documentation.

尼日利亚伊巴丹一家三级医院重症监护室使用的护理诊断领域。
背景:护理过程已被确定为有效护理实践的工具。然而,目前的证据表明,即使在21世纪,实施不力或完全没有利用。其中一个原因是缺乏了解的过程,基于缺乏病人评估的护士和不准确的护理诊断陈述。本研究的目的是确定护士进行护理评估的程度,并确定在研究环境中经常使用的护理诊断领域。方法:这是一项回顾性研究,在伊巴丹大学学院医院(UCH)的烧伤和心胸重症监护室进行。方便抽取患者护理流程手册230份,其中颅脑损伤患者护理流程手册80份,烧伤患者护理流程手册150份。使用描述性统计来计算研究结果。结果:所有患者均进行了初步护理评估;因此,确定了第一套护理诊断。仅28%的烧伤患者和32.5%的颅脑损伤患者进行了随护理诊断变化的时间滞后评估。最常用的护理诊断是第11领域-安全/保护(35.7%)。第二类包括护理诊断领域4-活动/测试”(28.6%),领域2-营养占14%,而其余21%(各占7%)分别为领域3,5和12-消除,认知和感知模式和安全/保护。领域1:健康促进、领域6:自我认知、领域7:角色关系、领域8:性行为、领域9:应对/压力耐受、领域10:生活原则和领域13没有护理诊断。成长和发展。CCONCLUSION加剧。应通过继续护理教育或研讨会来教育护士质量评估在有效临床判断中的重要性,并在所有领域充分利用护理诊断并提供充分的“文件”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信