PURPOSE.To determine the extent possible of developing an unequivocal formulation of a conceptual, structural, and contextual definition of “patient outcomes,” and the possibility of coming to an agreement on the criteria for classification of patient outcomes.
METHODS.An international Delphi survey of 33 experts.
FINDINGS.A conceptual, structural, and contextual definition of patient outcomes and priorities for the characteristics of patient outcome classification.
CONCLUSIONS.The authors recommend the unequivocalness of nursing terminology, not only for reasons of effectiveness and efficiency, but also to clarify the nursing vocabulary for epistemological reasons.
BurdickM.B.StuartG.W. (1994). Measuring nursing outcomes in a psychiatric setting. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 15, 137–148.
6.
CarnevaliD.L.ThomasM.D. (1993). Diagnostic reasoning and treatment decision making in nursing. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
7.
DonabedianF. (1992). The role of outcomes in quality assessment and assurance. Quality Review Bulletin, 18, 356–360.
8.
DuffieldC. (1993). The Delphi technique: A comparison of results obtained using two expert panels. Journal of Nursing Studies, 30, 227–237.
9.
GordonM. (1994). Nursing diagnosis: Process and application (3d ed.). St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book.
10.
GrantJ.S.KinneyM.R. (1992). Using the Delphi technique to examine the content validity of nursing diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis, 3, 12–22.
11.
GroenM. (1995). Definiëring en classificering van patient outcome [Definition and classification of patient outcome]. Maastricht, The Netherlands: University of Maastricht.
12.
GroenM. (1996). Towards a univocal definition and classification of patient outcome. Maastricht, The Netherlands: University of Maastricht.
13.
HigginsM.McCaughanD.GriffithsM.Carr-HillR. (1942) Assessing the outcomes of nursing care. Journal of Advanced Nursing.17, 561–568.
14.
HoskinsL.KerrM.FitzpatrickJ.WarrenJ.AvantK.CarpenitoL.HurleyM.JacobD.LunneyM.MillsW., and RottkampB. (1992). Axes: Focus of taxonomy II. Nursing Diagnosis, 3, 117–123.
15.
ICNP team drafts new definitions (1945). International Nursing Review, 42, 134.
16.
International classification for nursing practice: A unifying framework—The alpha version (1996). Geneva: International Council of Nurses.
17.
JenningsB.M. (1991). Patient outcomes research: Seizing the opportunity. Advances in Nursing Science, 14, 59–72.
18.
JohnsonM.MaasM. (1997). Nursing outcomes classification (NOC) St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book.
JonesJ.HunterD. (1995). Consensus methods for medical and health services research. British Medical journal, 311, 376–380.
21.
KerlingerF.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt. Saunders.
22.
KnightC.F.KnightP.F. (1992). Organizational factors to consider when developing a certification program for hospice nurses: A Delphi survey. Hospice Journal, 8, 59–71.
23.
LincolnY.S.CubaE.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24.
MoritzP. (1991). Innovative nursing practice models and patient out-comes. Nursing Outlook, 39, 111–114.
25.
SegersJ.H.G. (1977). Sociologische onderzoeksmethoden [Research methods in sociology]. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
26.
StraussG.ChassinM.LockJ. (1995). Can experts agree when to hospitalize adolescentsJournal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 418–424.
27.
Van derBruggenH. (1993). Vooronderzoek begrippenkader verpleegkunde: Standaard definities en classificaties [Preliminary research into nursing concepts: Standard definitions and classifications]. Zoetermeer, The Netherlands: Nationale Raad voor de Volksgezondheid.
28.
WhiteE. (1991). The future of psychiatric nursing by the year 2000: A Delphi study [Report]. Manchester, England: University of Manchester, Department of Nursing.
29.
WijvekateM.L. (1971). Methoden van onderzoek [Research methods]. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Het Spectrum.
30.
WilliamsP.L.WebbC. (1944). The Delphi technique: A methodological discussion. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, 180–186.
31.
WoodyardL.W.SheetzJ.E. (1993). Critical pathway patient outcomes: The missing standard. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 8, 51–57.
