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
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
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
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
DOCUMENT
Background: Patient Reported Experience Measures are promoted to be used as an integrated measurement approach in which outcomes are used to improve individual care (micro level), organisational quality (meso level) and external justification (macro level). However, a deeper understanding of implementation issues of these measures is necessary. The narrative Patient Reported Experience Measure “Dit vind ik ervan!” (English “How I feel about it!”) is used in the Dutch disability care sector, but insight into its’ current use is lacking. We aimed to provide insight into experiences with the implementation and current ways of working with “Dit vind ik ervan!” as an integrated measurement strategy. A descriptive qualitative study was done at a disability care organisation. Data were collected by nine documentations, seven observations, 11 interviews and three focus groups. We applied deductive content analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as a framework. Results: Our analysis revealed facilitators and barriers for the implementation of “Dit vind ik ervan!”. We found most barriers at the micro level. Professionals and clients appreciated the measure’s narrative approach, but struggled to perform it with communication vulnerable clients. Some clients, professionals and team leaders were unfamiliar with the measure’s aim and benefit. On the meso level, implementation was done top-down, and the management’s vision using the measure as an integrated measurement approach was insufficiently shared throughout the organisation. Conclusions: Our study shows that Patient Reported Experience Measures have the potential to be used as an integrated measurement strategy. Yet, we found barriers at the micro level, which might have influenced using the measurement outcomes at the meso and macro level. Tailored implementation strategies, mostly focusing on designing and preparing the implementation on themicro level, need to be developed in co-creation with all stakeholders.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Retrospective studies suggest that a rapid initiation of treatment results in a better prognosis for patients in the emergency department. There could be a difference between the actual medication administration time and the documented time in the electronic health record. In this study, the difference between the observed medication administration time and documentation time was investigated. Patient and nurse characteristics were also tested for associations with observed time differences. Methods: In this prospective study, emergency nurses were followed by observers for a total of 3 months. Patient inclusion was divided over 2 time periods. The difference in the observed medication administration time and the corresponding electronic health record documentation time was measured. The association between patient/nurse characteristics and the difference in medication administration and documentation time was tested with a Spearman correlation or biserial correlation test. Results: In 34 observed patients, the median difference in administration and documentation time was 6.0 minutes (interquartile range 2.0-16.0). In 9 (26.5%) patients, the actual time of medication administration differed more than 15 minutes with the electronic health record documentation time. High temperature, lower saturation, oxygen-dependency, and high Modified Early Warning Score were all correlated with an increasing difference between administration and documentation times. Discussion: A difference between administration and documentation times of medication in the emergency department may be common, especially for more acute patients. This could bias, in part, previously reported time-to-treatment measurements from retrospective research designs, which should be kept in mind when outcomes of retrospective time-to-treatment studies are evaluated.
DOCUMENT
AIM: This paper is a report of the development and testing of the psychometric properties of an instrument to measure the accuracy of nursing documentation in general hospitals.BACKGROUND: Little information is available about the accuracy of nursing documentation. None of the existing instruments that quantify accuracy of nursing diagnoses, interventions, and progress and outcome evaluations are suitable to measure documentation in general hospital environments, nor were they intended for this purpose.METHOD: The D-Catch instrument, based on the Cat-ch-Ing instrument and the Scale for Degrees of Accuracy in Nursing Diagnoses, was developed in 2007-2008. Content validity of the D-Catch instrument was assessed by two Delphi panels, in which pairs of independent reviewers assessed 245 patient records in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Construct validity was assessed by explorative factor analysis with principal components and varimax rotation. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach's alpha. The inter-rater reliability of the D-Catch instrument was tested by calculating Cohen's weighted kappa (K(w)) for each pair of reviewers. Results. Quantity and quality variables were used to assess the accuracy of nursing documentation. Three constructs were identified in the factor analysis. 'Accuracy of the nursing diagnosis' was the only variable with substantial loading on component two (0.907) and a modest loading on component one (0.230). Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.722. The inter-rater reliability (K(w)) varied between 0.742 and 0.896.CONCLUSION: The D-Catch instrument is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to assess nursing documentation in general hospital settings.
DOCUMENT
