PURPOSE To review the use of diagnosis-specific outcomes in health care and nursing.
DATA SOURCES Published literature, information databases.
DATA SYNTHESIS The need to identify nursing diagnosis–specific outcomes is necessary in order to expand nursing's knowledge base and identify the cost-effectiveness of nursing interventions.
CONCLUSIONS Outcomes work needs to be done across settings where care is provided.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Outcomes information is necessary to identify the cost and impact of nursing interventions.
OBJETIVO Revisar o uso de resultados específicos para diagnósticos nos cuidados de enfermagem e de saúde.
FONTES DE DADOS Literatura, capítulos de livros, bancos de dados de informações.
SÍNTESE DOS DADOS A identificação de resultados específicos para diagnósticos é necessária para expandir a base de conhecimentos de enfermagem e identificar a relação custom-efetividade das intervenções de enfermagem.
CONCLUSÃO O trabalho com os resultados deve ser realizado nos locais onde se realiza a assistência de enfermagem.
IMPLICAÇÕES PARA A PRÁTICA A informação sobre os resultados é necessária para identificar o custo e o impacto das intervenções de enfermagem.
PROPÓSITO Revisar el uso de resultados específicos al diagnóstico en cuidados de salud y enfermería.
FUENTES DE LOS DATOS Bibliografía, capítulos del libro, bases de datos de información.
SÍNTESIS DE LOS DATOS La necesidad de identificar resultados específicos al diagnóstico de enfermería, es necesario para expandir la base de conocimientos de enfermería e identificar el costo-efectividad de las intervenciones de enfermería.
CONCLUSIONES Es necesario hacer trabajo de resultados de enfermería en todos los ámbitos de cuidados.
IMPLICACIONES PARA LA PRÁCTICA Se necesita información sobre los resultados para identificar el coste e impacto de las intervenciones enfermeras.
American Nurses Association. (1995). Nursing care report card for acute care. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BrownD.S. (1992). A conceptual framework for the evaluation of service quality. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 6(1), 66–74.1611107
3.
DochtermanJ.M.BulechekG.M. (2004). Nursing interventions classification (4th ed.). St. Louis: Mosby.
4.
DonabedianA. (1966). Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 44, 166–206.5338568
5.
DonabedianA. (1985). The methods and findings of quality assessment and monitoring: An illustrated analysis (vol. 3). Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press.
6.
GilletteB.JenkoM. (1991). Major clinical functions: A unifying framework for measuring outcomes. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 6(1), 20–24.1912616
7.
HoytK.S. (1997). Validating nursing with “NANDA, NIC, and NOC.”Journal of Emergency Room Nursing, 23, 507–509.
8.
JohnsonM. (2002). Variables for outcome analysis. Outcomes Management, 6(3), 95–98.12134379
9.
JohnsonM.BulechekG.MaasM.McCloskey DochtermanJ.M.MoorheadS. (2001). Nursing diagnoses, interventions and outcomes: NANDA, NIC, and NOC linkages. St. Louis: Mosby.
10.
JohnsonM.MaasM.L. (1999). Nursing-sensitive patient outcomes development and importance for use in assessing health care effectiveness. InCohenE.DeBackV. (Eds.), The outcomes mandate, case management in health care today (pp.37–48). St. Louis: Mosby.
11.
JohnsonM.MaasM.MoorheadS. (2000). Nursing outcomes classification (2nd ed.). St. Louis: Mosby.
12.
MarekK.D. (1989). Outcomes measurement in nursing. Journal of Nursing Quality Assurance, 4(1), 1–9.2689466
13.
MartinK.S.NorrisJ.LeakG.K. (1999). Psychometric analysis of the problem rating scale for outcomes. Outcomes Management for Nursing Practice, 3(1), 20–25.9934194
14.
MartinK.S.ScheetN.J. (1992). The Omaha system: Applications for community health nursing. Philadelphia: Saunders.
15.
McCormickK. (1991). Future data needs for quality care monitoring, DRG considerations, reimbursement and outcome measurement. Image, 23, 29–32.
16.
McDonaldC.J.OverhageJ.M.DexterP.R.BlevinsL.Meeks-JohnsonJ.SuicoJ.G., et al. (1998). Canopy computing: Using the Web in clinical practice. JAMA, 280, 1325–1329.9794311
17.
MitchellP.H.FerketichS.JenningsB.M. (1998). Quality health outcomes model. Image, 30, 43–46.
18.
MitchellP.H.HeinrichJ.MoritzP.HinshawA.S. (Eds.) (1997). Outcome measures and care delivery systems conference. Medical Care, 35 (Suppl. 11), entire issue.
19.
MoorheadS.JohnsonM.MaasM. (2004). Nursing outcomes classification (3rd ed.). St. Louis: Mosby.
NaylorM.D.MunroB.H.BrootenD.A. (1991). Measuring the effectiveness of nursing practice. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 5, 210–215.1764655
22.
NielsenG.H.MortensenR.A. (1997). The architecture of ICNP: Time for outcomes–Part II. International Nursing Review, 45(1), 27–31.
23.
OzboltJ.G.FruchtnightJ.N.HaydenJ.R. (1994). Toward data standards for clinical nursing information. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 1, 175–185.7719798
24.
PaceK.G. (1995). Data sets for home care organizations. Caring, 14(3), 38–42.10141426
25.
ReverbyS. (1981). Stealing the golden eggs: Ernest Amory Codman and the science and management of medicine. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 55, 156–171.7020802
26.
SabaV. (1992). The classification of home health care nursing: Diagnoses and interventions. Caring, 11(3), 50–57.10183631
27.
ScherbC.A. (2002). Outcomes research: Making a difference in practice. Outcomes Management, 6(1), 22–26.12500412
28.
ShaughnessyP.W.CrislerK.S. (1995). Outcome-based quality improvement: A manual for home care agencies on how to use outcomes. Washington, DC: National Association for Home Care.
29.
SimpsonR. (1997). Taking advantage of managed care opportunities. Nursing Management, 28(3), 24–25.
