Development and Content Validity Testing of a Comprehensive Classification of Diagnoses for Pediatric Nurse Practitioners

Abstract

Pediatric nurse practitioners (PNPs) need an integrated, comprehensive classification that includes nursing, disease, and developmental diagnoses to effectively describe their practice. No such classification exists. Further, methodologic studies to help evaluate the content validity of any nursing taxonomy are unavailable. A conceptual framework was derived. Then 178 diagnoses from the North American Nursing Diagnosis Association (NANDA) 1986 list, selected diagnoses from the International Classification of Diseases, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Third Revision, and others were selected. This framework identified and listed, with definitions, three domains of diagnoses: Developmental Problems, Diseases, and Daily Living Problems. The diagnoses were ranked using a 4-point scale (4=highly related to l=not related) and were placed into the three domains. The rating scale was assigned by a panel of eight expert pediatric nurses. Diagnoses that were assigned to the Daily Living Problems domain were then sorted into the 11 Functional Health patterns described by Gordon (1987). Reliability was measured using proportions of agreement and Kappas. Content validity of the groups created was measured using indices of content validity and average congruency percentages.

The experts used a new method to sort the diagnoses in a new way that decreased overlaps among the domains. The Developmental and Disease domains were judged reliable and valid. The Daily Living domain of nursing diagnoses showed marginally acceptable validity with acceptable reliability. Six Functional Health Patterns were judged reliable and valid, mixed results were determined for four categories, and the Coping/Stress Tolerance category was judged reliable but not valid using either test. There were considerable differences between the panel's, Gordon's (1987), and NANDA's clustering of NANDA diagnoses. This study defines the diagnostic practice of nurses from a holistic, patient-centered perspective. It is the first study to use quantitative methods to test a diagnostic classification system for nursing. The classification model could also be adapted for other nurse specialties.

Keywords

nursing diagnosi pediatric nurse practitioners classification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Nurses' Association (1980). Nursing: A social policy statement. Kansas city, MO: author.

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: author.

Barnard

(1985). Review Group 3 Discussant Paper, Nursing Minimum Date Set Conference, Milwaukee, WI, 1985.

Blashfield

R.K.

Draguns

J.C.

(1976). Toward a taxonomy of psychopathology: The purpose of psychiatric classification. British Journal of Psychiatry, 129, 574–583.

Blashfield

(1976). Mixture model tests of cluster analysis: Accuracy of four agglomerative hierarchical methods. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 377–388.

Brand

Chisholm

Hoelzel–Zeipp

Kennison

Rosen

(1987). A new nursing diagnosis system. Home Healthcare Nurse, 5, 12–16.

Burns

(1989). Development and field testing of a classification of diagnoses for use by pediatric nurse practitioners Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.

Burns

(in press). A new assessment model and tool for pediatric nurse practitioners. Journal of Pediatric Health Care..

Burns

Thompson

M.K.

(1984). Developing a nursing diagnosis classification system for pediatric nurse practitioners. Pediatric Nursing, 10, 411–414.

10.

Carnevali

(1983). Nursing care planning: Diagnosis and management. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

11.

Carpenito

(1985). Nursing diagnosis: Selected dilemmas in practice. Occupational Health Nursing, 33, 397–400.

12.

Dickoff

James

(1989). Theoretical pluralism for nursing diagnosis. In Carroll–Johnson

R.M

(Ed.) Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the eighth conference (pp. 98–105). Philadelphia: Lippincott.

13.

Fawcett

(1984) The metaparadigm of nursing: present status and future refinements. Image 15, 84–87.

14.

Garthe

(1987). Analysis of distinctions between nursing diagnosis-related judgements and disease related nursing judgements. In McLane

(Ed.), Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the seventh conference (pp. 333–340). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.

15.

Gordon

(1987). Nursing diagnosis: Process and application, (2nd ed). New York: McGraw–Hill.

16.

Hasselblad

(1968). Estimation of parameters for a mixture of normal distributions. Technometrics, 8, 431–444.

17.

International classification of diseases, 9th revision, clinical modification (1981). (DHHS Publication No. PHS 80–1260). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office No. PHS 80–1260.

18.

Jenny

(1988). Classification of nursing diagnoses: A Self-care Approach. In Carroll–Johnson

R.M.

(Ed.). Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the eighth conference (pp. 152–157). Philadelphia: Lippincott.

19.

Kelly

(1985). Nursing diagnosis source book. Nor-walk, CT: Appleton–Century Crofts.

20.

Kim

(1986). Nursing diagnosis: A Janus view. In Hurley

(Ed.), Classification of nursing diagnosis: Proceedings of the sixth conference (pp. 1–14). St.Louis, MO: Mosby.

21.

Lazersfeld

Henry

(1968). Latent structure analysis. Boston: Houghton–Mifflin.

22.

Loomis

Wood

(1983). Cure: The potential outcome of nursing care. Image, 15, 4–7.

23.

Lunney

(1982). Nursing diagnosis: Refining the system. American Journal of Nursing, 82, 456–459.

24.

Norris

(1982). Concept clarification in nursing. Rockville, MD: Aspen.

25.

NANDA-approved nursing diagnostic categories (1988). Nursing Diagnosis Newsletter, 15 (1). St.Louis, MO: North American Nursing Diagnosis Association.

26.

Pender

(1988). Languaging a health perspective for NANDA Taxonomy on research and theory. In Carroll–Johnson

R.M.

(Ed.), Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the 8th conference (pp. 31–36). Philadelphia: Lippincott.

27.

Porter

(1986). Critical Analysis of NANDA Nursing Diagnosis Taxonomy I. Image, 18, 136–139.

28.

Simmons

(1980). A classification scheme for client problems in community health nursing (DHHS Publication No. HRA 80–16). Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Nursing.

29.

Waltz

Strickland

Lenz

(1984). Measurement in nursing research. Philadelphia: FA Davis.