AIM: To obtain an overview of existing evidence on quality criteria, instruments, and requirements for nursing documentation.DESIGN: Systematic review of systematic reviews.DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched the databases PubMed and CINAHL for the period 2007-April 2017. We also performed additional searches.REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently selected the reviews using a stepwise procedure, assessed the methodological quality of the selected reviews, and extracted the data using a predefined extraction format. We performed descriptive synthesis.RESULTS: Eleven systematic reviews were included. Several quality criteria were described referring to the importance of following the nursing process and using standardized nursing terminologies. In addition, some evidence-based instruments were described for assessing the quality of nursing documentation, such as the D-Catch. Furthermore, several requirements for formats and systems of electronic nursing documentation were found that refer to the importance of user-friendliness and development in consultation with nursing staff.CONCLUSION: Aligning documentation with the nursing process, using standard terminologies, and using user-friendly formats and systems appear to be important for high-quality nursing documentation. The lack of evidence-based quality indicators presents a challenge in the pursuit of high-quality nursing documentation.IMPACT: There is uncertainty in nursing practice about which criteria have to be met to achieve high-quality documentation. Aligning documentation with the nursing process, using standard terminologies, and using user-friendly formats and systems appear to be important. These findings can help nursing staff and care organizations enhance the quality of nursing documentation.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Patients are increasingly expected to take an active role in their own care. Participation in nursing documentation can support patients to take this active role since it provides opportunities to express care needs and preferences. Yet, patient participation in electronic nursing documentation is not self-evident.OBJECTIVE: To explore how home-care patients perceive their participation in electronic nursing documentation.METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 home-care patients. Interview transcripts were analysed in an iterative process based on the principles of reflexive inductive thematic analysis.RESULTS: We identified a typology with four patient types: 'high need, high ability', 'high need, low ability', 'low need, high ability' and 'low need, low ability'. Several patients felt a need for participation because of their personal interest in health information. Others did not feel such a need since they trusted nurses to document the information that is important. Patients' ability to participate increased when they could read the documentation and when nurses helped them by talking about the documentation. Barriers to patients' ability to participate were having no electronic devices or lacking digital skills, a lack of support from nurses and the poor usability of electronic patient portals.CONCLUSION: Patient participation in electronic nursing documentation varies between patients since home-care patients differ in their need and ability to participate. Nurses should tailor their encouragement of patient participation to individual patients' needs and abilities. Furthermore, they should be aware of their own role and help patients to participate in the documentation.PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Home-care patients were involved in the interviews.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Patient participation in nursing documentation has several benefits like including patients' personal wishes in tailor-made care plans and facilitating shared decision-making. However, the rise of electronic health records may not automatically lead to greater patient participation in nursing documentation. This study aims to gain insight into community nurses' experiences regarding patient participation in electronic nursing documentation, and to explore the challenges nurses face and the strategies they use for dealing with challenges regarding patient participation in electronic nursing documentation.METHODS: A qualitative descriptive design was used, based on the principles of reflexive thematic analysis. Nineteen community nurses working in home care and using electronic health records were recruited using purposive sampling. Interviews guided by an interview guide were conducted face-to-face or by phone in 2019. The interviews were inductively analysed in an iterative process of data collection-data analysis-more data collection until data saturation was achieved. The steps of thematic analysis were followed, namely familiarization with data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and reporting.RESULTS: Community nurses believed patient participation in nursing documentation has to be tailored to each patient. Actual participation depended on the phase of the nursing process that was being documented and was facilitated by patients' trust in the accuracy of the documentation. Nurses came across challenges in three domains: those related to electronic health records (i.e. technical problems), to work (e.g. time pressure) and to the patients (e.g. the medical condition). Because of these challenges, nurses frequently did the documentation outside the patient's home. Nurses still tried to achieve patient participation by verbally discussing patients' views on the nursing care provided and then documenting those views at a later moment.CONCLUSIONS: Although community nurses consider patient participation in electronic nursing documentation important, they perceive various challenges relating to electronic health records, work and the patients to realize patient participation. In dealing with these challenges, nurses often fall back on verbal communication about the documentation. These insights can help nurses and policy makers improve electronic health records and develop efficient strategies for improving patient participation in electronic nursing documentation.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: The time that nurses spent on documentation can be substantial and burdensome. To date it was unknown if documentation activities are related to the workload that nurses perceive. A distinction between clinical documentation and organizational documentation seems relevant. This study aims to gain insight into community nurses' views on a potential relationship between their clinical and organizational documentation activities and their perceived nursing workload.METHODS: A convergent mixed-methods design was used. A quantitative survey was completed by 195 Dutch community nurses and a further 28 community nurses participated in qualitative focus groups. For the survey an online questionnaire was used. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed-ranked tests, Spearman's rank correlations and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to analyse the survey data. Next, four qualitative focus groups were conducted in an iterative process of data collection - data analysis - more data collection, until data saturation was reached. In the qualitative analysis, the six steps of thematic analysis were followed.RESULTS: The majority of the community nurses perceived a high workload due to documentation activities. Although survey data showed that nurses estimated that they spent twice as much time on clinical documentation as on organizational documentation, the workload they perceived from these two types of documentation was comparable. Focus-group participants found organizational documentation particularly redundant. Furthermore, the survey indicated that a perceived high workload was not related to actual time spent on clinical documentation, while actual time spent on organizational documentation was related to the perceived workload. In addition, the survey showed no associations between community nurses' perceived workload and the user-friendliness of electronic health records. Yet focus-group participants did point towards the impact of limited user-friendliness on their perceived workload. Lastly, there was no association between the perceived workload and whether the nursing process was central in the electronic health records.CONCLUSIONS: Community nurses often perceive a high workload due to clinical and organizational documentation activities. Decreasing the time nurses have to spend specifically on organizational documentation and improving the user-friendliness and intercommunicability of electronic health records appear to be important ways of reducing the workload that community nurses perceive.
DOCUMENT
Nursing staff working in long-term institutional care attend to residents with an increasing number of severe physical and cognitive limitations. To exchange information about the health status of these residents, accurate nursing documentation is important to ensure the safety of residents. This study examined the accuracy of nursing documentation in 197 care plans of five long-term institutional care facilities. Based on the phases of the nursing process, the D-Catch instrument measures the accuracy of the content and coherence of documentation. Inadequacies were especially found in the description of residents' care needs and stated nursing diagnoses as well as in progress and outcome reports. In somatic and psycho-geriatric units, higher accuracy scores were determined compared with residential care units. Investments in resources (e.g., time), reasoning skills of nursing staff, and implementation of professional standards in accordance with legal requirements may be needed to enhance the quality of nursing documentation.
DOCUMENT
AIM: To identify what determinants influence the prevalence and accuracy of nursing diagnosis documentation in clinical practice.BACKGROUND: Nursing diagnoses guide and direct nursing care. They are the foundation for goal setting and provide the basis for interventions. The literature mentions several factors that influences nurses' documentation of diagnoses, such as a nurse's level of education, patient's condition and the ward environment.DESIGN: Systematic review.METHOD: MEDLINE and CINAHL databases were searched using the following headings and keywords: nursing diagnosis, nursing documentation, hospitals, influence, utilisation, quality, implementation and accuracy. The search was limited to articles published between 1995-October 2009. Studies were only selected if they were written in English and were primary studies addressing factors that influence nursing diagnosis documentation.RESULTS: In total, 24 studies were included. Four domains of factors that influence the prevalence and accuracy of diagnoses documentation were found: (1) the nurse as a diagnostician, (2) diagnostic education and resources, (3) complexity of a patient's situation and (4) hospital policy and environment.CONCLUSION: General factors, which influence decision-making, and nursing documentation and specific factors, which influence the prevalence and accuracy of nursing diagnoses documentation, need to be distinguished. To support nurses in documenting their diagnoses accurately, we recommend taking a comprehensive perspective on factors that influence diagnoses documentation. A conceptual model of determinants that influence nursing diagnoses documentation, as presented in this study, may be helpful as a reference for nurse managers and nurse educators.RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review gives hospital management an overview of determinants for possible quality improvements in nursing diagnoses documentation that needs to be undertaken in clinical practice.
LINK
AIM: This paper is a report of a study conducted to describe the accuracy of nursing documentation in patient records in hospitals. Background. Accurate nursing documentation enables nurses to systematically review the nursing process and to evaluate the quality of care. Assessing nurses' reports in patient records can be helpful for improving the accuracy of nursing documentation.METHOD: In 2007-2008, we screened patient records (n = 341) from 35 wards in 10 hospitals in the Netherlands. The D-Catch instrument was used to quantify the accuracy of the (1) record structure, (2) admission data, (3) nursing diagnosis, (4) nursing interventions, (5) progress and outcome evaluations and (6) legibility of nursing reports. Items 2-5 were measured as a sum score of quantity criteria (1-4) and quality criteria (1-4), whereas Items 1 and 6 were measured on a 4-point Likert scale that addressed only quality criteria.FINDINGS: The domain 'accuracy of the interventions' had the lowest accuracy scores: 95% of the records revealed a scale score not higher than 5. However, the domain 'admission' had the highest scores: 80% of the records revealed a scale score over 5.CONCLUSION: Effective documentation systems that support nurses in linking diagnoses, interventions and progress and outcome evaluations could be helpful. To improve the accuracy of the documentation, further research is needed on what factors influence nursing documentation. Comparable outcomes from other studies indicate that applying our study findings to international contexts might support the development of universal criteria for accurate nursing documentation.
DOCUMENT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the D-Catch instrument.METHODS: A cross-sectional methodological study. Validity and reliability were estimated with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, respectively.FINDINGS: A sample of 250 nursing documentations was selected. CFA showed the adequacy of a 1-factor model (chronologically descriptive accuracy) with an outlier item (nursing diagnosis accuracy). Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were adequate.CONCLUSIONS: The D-Catch is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the accuracy of nursing documentation. Caution is needed when measuring diagnostic accuracy since only one item measures this dimension.IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: The D-Catch can be used as an indicator of the accuracy of nursing documentation and the quality of nursing care.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVES Previous studies regarding nursing documentation focused primarily on documentation quality, for instance, in terms of the accuracy of the documentation. The combination between accuracy measurements and the quality and frequencies of outcome variables such as the length of the hospital stay were only minimally addressed. METHOD An audit of 300 randomly selected digital nursing records of patients (age of >70 years) admitted between 2013-2014 for hip surgery in two orthopaedic wards of a general Dutch hospital was conducted. RESULTS Nursing diagnoses: Impaired tissue perfusion (wound), Pressure ulcer, and Deficient fluid volume had significant influence on the length of the hospital stay. CONCLUSION Nursing process documentation can be used for outcome calculations. Nevertheless, in the first generation of electronic health records, nursing diagnoses were not documented in a standardized manner (First generation 2010-2015; the first generation of electronic records implemented in clinical practice in the Netherlands).
DOCUMENT
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is (a) to describe care needs derived from records of patients in Dutch hospitals, and (b) to evaluate whether nurses employed the NANDA-I classification to formulate patients' care needs.METHODS: A stratified cross-sectional random-sampling nursing documentation audit was conducted employing the D-Catch instrument in 10 hospitals comprising 37 wards.FINDINGS: The most prevalent nursing diagnoses were acute pain, nausea, fatigue, and risk for impaired skin integrity.CONCLUSIONS: Most care needs were determined in physiological health patterns and few in psychosocial patterns.IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: To perform effective interventions leading to high-quality nursing-sensitive outcomes, nurses should also diagnose patients' care needs in the health management, value-belief, and coping stress patterns.
DOCUMENT
