Correspondence Between NANDA International Nursing Diagnoses and Outcomes as Proposed by the Nursing Outcomes Classification

Abstract

The data evidence the relevance of this review for a reliable application of these taxonomies and demonstrated partial correspondence between concepts analyzed. A identificação precisa dos diagnósticos de enfermagem e a medida correspondente dos seus indicadores dependerá dos elementos nos sistemas de linguagem padronizados.

Factors influencing clinical decision making used by mental health nurses to provide provisional diagnosis: A scoping review

“…In the United States, NANDA has been influential in developing a common language reflecting the complexities of nursing practices through the use of nursing diagnosis which facilitates nursing care (de Carvalho et al . ); however, these are not used in Australia. Interestingly, a Turkish study found 15–20% of nurses do not value nursing diagnosis when providing care (Akbulut & Akpinar ).…”

“…Diagnostic practice within the nursing profession is controversial, with many nurses, medical officers, and allied health professionals arguing that it is outside of the nurse's scope of practice (Baid 2006;Cashin et al 2010;Sands 2009). In the United States, NANDA has been influential in developing a common language reflecting the complexities of nursing practices through the use of nursing diagnosis which facilitates nursing care (de Carvalho et al 2018); however, these are not used in Australia. Interestingly, a Turkish study found 15-20% of nurses do not value nursing diagnosis when providing care (Akbulut & Akpinar 2017).…”

“…Nursing diagnosis differs from medical diagnosis in that nursing diagnosis is a clinical judgement about individual/family/community responses to actual or potential health problems or life processes (NANDA International 2013), whereas a medical diagnosis aims to classify a patient as having a particular disease or condition (Bertaud-Gounot et al 2012). Despite the development of NANDA I nursing diagnosis, they have not been widely adopted or embraced in the Australian healthcare context (de Carvalho et al 2018). It is unclear why the NANDA I nursing diagnosis framework is no longer used in Australia.…”

“…Despite the development of NANDA I nursing diagnosis, they have not been widely adopted or embraced in the Australian healthcare context (de Carvalho et al . ). It is unclear why the NANDA I nursing diagnosis framework is no longer used in Australia.…”

The Adequacy of the Q Methodology for Clinical Validation of Nursing Diagnoses Related to Subjective Foci

“…The clinical validation results are very important because they provide better knowledge for the improvement of the classification while moving the theoretical knowledge closer to clinical evidence (Caldeira, Timmins, Carvalho, & Vieira, 2015). This reinforces the need to understand the factors included in the nursing diagnosis, their relationship with the clinical presentation (signs and symptoms), and possible cause (etiology) in order to gain practice with efficient and measurable interventions (Carvalho et al, 2016). More validation studies using specialist nurses and patients in clinical settings are necessary to refine the defining characteristics, to discuss the taxonomy structure, and to contribute to the completeness and coherence of the taxonomy (Caldeira, Carvalho, & Vieira, 2013).…”