Conectar
To determine the prevalence and clustering of NANDA-International nursing diagnoses in patients assisted by pre-hospital emergency teams.
Retrospective descriptive study of electronic record review.
Episodes recorded during 2019, including at least a nursing diagnosis, were recovered from the electronic health records of a Spanish public emergency agency (N = 28,847). Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample and determine prevalence. A two-step cluster analysis was used to group nursing diagnoses. A comparison between clusters in sociodemographic and medical problems was performed. Data were accessed in November 2020.
Risk for falls (00155) (27.3%), Anxiety (00146) (23.2%), Acute pain (00132), Fear (00148) and Ineffective breathing pattern (00032) represented 96.1% of all recorded diagnoses. A six-cluster solution (n = 26.788) was found. Five clusters had a single high-prevalence diagnosis predominance: Risk for falls (00155) in cluster 1, Anxiety (00146) in cluster 2, Fear (00148) in cluster 3, Acute pain (00132) in cluster 4 and Ineffective breathing pattern (00032) in cluster 6. Cluster 5 had several high prevalence diagnoses which co-occurred: Risk for unstable blood glucose level (00179), Ineffective coping (00069), Ineffective health management (00078), Impaired comfort (00214) and Impaired verbal communication (00051).
Five nursing diagnoses accounted for almost the entire prevalence. The identified clusters showed that pre-hospital patients present six patterns of nursing diagnoses. Five clusters were predominated by a predominant nursing diagnosis related to patient safety, coping, comfort, and activity/rest, respectively. The sixth cluster grouped several nursing diagnoses applicable to exacerbations of chronic diseases.
Knowing the prevalence and clustering of nursing diagnoses allows a better understanding of the human responses of patients attended by pre-hospital emergency teams and increases the evidence of individualized/standardized care plans in the pre-hospital clinical setting.
What problem did the study address? There are different models of pre-hospital emergency care services. The use of standardized nursing languages in the pre-hospital setting is not homogeneous. Studies on NANDA-I nursing diagnoses in the pre-hospital context are scarce, and those available are conducted on small samples.
What were the main findings? This paper reports the study with the largest sample among the few published on NANDA-I nursing diagnoses in the pre-hospital care setting. Five nursing diagnoses represented 96.1% of all recorded. These diagnoses were related to patients' safety/protection and coping/stress tolerance. Patients attended by pre-hospital care teams are grouped into six clusters based on the nursing diagnoses, and this classification is independent of the medical conditions the patient suffers.
Where and on whom will the research have an impact?
Knowing the prevalence of nursing diagnoses allows a better understanding of the human responses of patients treated in the pre-hospital setting, increasing the evidence of individualized and standardized care plans for pre-hospital care.
STROBE checklist has been used as a reporting method.
Only patients' records were reviewed without further involvement.
by Mila Pacheco, Pedro Sá, Gláucia Santos, Ney Boa-Sorte, Kilma Domingues, Larissa Assis, Marina Silva, Ana Oliveira, Daniel Santos, Jamile Ferreira, Rosemeire Fernandes, Flora Fortes, Raquel Rocha, Genoile Santana
AimsEvaluate the impact of an intervention program in non-adherent patients with ulcerative colitis.
MethodsParallel controlled randomized clinical trial (1:1), approved by the ethics committee (No. 3.068.511/2018) and registered at The Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (No. RBR-79dn4k). Non-adherent ulcerative colitis patients according to the Morisky-Green-Levine-test were included. Recruitment began in August 2019 until August 2020, with 6-month follow-up. All participants received standard usual care, and additionally the intervention group received educational (video, educational leaflet, verbal guidance) and behavioral interventions (therapeutic scheme, motivational and reminder type short message services). Researchers were blinded for allocation prior to data collection at Visits 1 and 2 (0 and 6 months). Primary outcome: 180-day adherence rate, with relative risk 95%CI. Secondary outcome: 180-day quality of life according to SF-36 domains, using Student’s t test. Variables with p Results
Forty-six and 49 participants were allocated in control and intervention groups, respectively. Two were excluded due to intervention refusal, and 4 and 6 were lost to follow-up in control and intervention groups. There was no post-intervention adherence rate difference, even after adjustment for type of non-adherence (unintentional/both/intentional) as confounder, or if considered as adherent the intervention group participants lost in follow-up. Interventions promoted better quality of life scores even after multivariate analysis for “Pain”, when adjusted for ulcerative colitis severity, sex, and marital status (β = 18.352, p = 0.004), “Vitality”, when adjusted for ulcerative colitis severity (β = 10.568, p = 0.015) and “Emotional Aspects”, when adjusted for disease severity, income, and education (β = 24.907, p = 0.041).
ConclusionsThe intervention program was not able to produce a significant medication adherence rate difference between comparative groups, however, there was a significant improvement in quality of life. Study limitations may include: sample size calculated to identify differences of 30%, leading to a possible insufficient power; non blinded participants, exposing the results to the risk of performance bias; outcomes based on self-reported data.
FreshRSS 