A Pilot Study to Validate the Priority Nursing Interventions Classification Interventions and Nursing Outcomes Classification Outcomes for the Nursing Diagnosis “Excess Fluid Volume” in Cardiac Patients
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April, 2009
A Pilot Study to Validate the Priority Nursing Interventions Classification Interventions and Nursing Outcomes Classification Outcomes for the Nursing Diagnosis “Excess Fluid Volume” in Cardiac Patients
PURPOSE. To validate the content of the priority Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC) interventions and Nursing Outcomes Classification (NOC)-suggested outcomes for cardiac patients with the nursing diagnosis excess fluid volume in the Brazilian context.
METHODS. The content of the interventions and outcomes was scored by seven expert nurses using a Likert scale, using the Fehring model.
FINDINGS. From the 83 activities of the priority NIC interventions, nine had scores lower than 0.5 (nonuseful) and 50 had scores higher than 0.8 (major); from the 53 indicators of the suggested NOC outcomes, eight scored lower than 0.5 and 26 had scores higher than 0.8.
CONCLUSIONS. The majority of the NIC interventions and NOC outcomes were considered useful by the Brazilian Cardiology expert nurses.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE. Clinical studies are an important strategy for validation of the usefulness of North American Nursing Diagnosis Association, NIC, and NOC language in clinical protocols. Additional studies are necessary to confirm the findings of this pilot study.
BulechekG. M.McCloskeyJ. C. (1992). Defining and validating nursing interventions. Nursing Clinics of North America, 27, 289–297.
2.
CamilloS. O.SilvaA. L.NascimentoA. J. (2007). Perceptions of nursing undergraduate students concerning the human dimension in the learning process. Revista latinoamericana de enfermagem, 15(2), 207–213.
3.
CarpenitoL. J. (2004). Nursing care plans and documentation: Nursing diagnoses and collaborative problems (4th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
4.
CullenL. (1992). Interventions related to fluid and electrolyte balance. Nursing Clinics of North America, 27, 569–597.
5.
FehringR. J. (1987). Methods to validate nursing diagnoses. Heart Lung, 16, 625–629.
6.
GuimarãesH. C. Q. C. P. (2000). Intervenções de enfermagem propostas pela Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC) para o diagnóstico “excesso de volume de líquidos”[Nursing interventions for the nursing diagnosis “fluid volume excess” according to nursing interventions classification (NIC)]. PhD Thesis, Nursing Department of São Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, Brazil.
7.
GuimarãesJ. I.MesquitaE. T.BocchiE. A.Vilas-BoasF.MonteraM. W.MoreiraM. C. V., et al. (2002). Revisão das II Diretrizes da Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia para o Diagnóstico e Tratamento da Insuficiência Cardíaca [Review of the II Guidelines of the Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia for the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure]. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 79, 1–30.
McCloskeyJ. C.BulechekG. M. (Eds.) (2000). Nursing interventions classification (NIC) (3rd ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
10.
MesquitaE. T.BocchiE. A.Vilas-BoasA.PerroneS.CaamañoA. G.ClausellN., et al. (2005). I Diretriz Latino-Americana para Avaliação e Conduta na Insuficiência Cardíaca Descompensada [I Latin American Guidelines for the assessment and management of decompensated heart failure]. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 85, 1–48.
11.
MortonP. G.FountaineD. K.HudakC. M.GalloB. M. (2002). Critical care nursing: A holistic approach (8th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
SmeltzerS. C. C.BareB. G. (2004). Brunner and Suddarth's textbook of medical-surgical nursing (10th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
14.
TitlerM. G. (1992). Interventions related to surveillance. Nursing Clinics of North America, 27, 495–515.
15.
TrezzaE. (2004). Insuficiência cardíaca: individualização do tratamento [Heart failure: Treatment individualization]. Revista da Sociedade de Cardiologia do Estado de São Paulo, 14, 167–178.
