Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the effect of implementing hospital discharge planning based on NANDA-International, NIC, and NOC taxonomies for patients with HF or diabetes mellitus.
Does hospital discharge planning based on nursing taxonomies improve disease management knowledge in adult patients hospitalized for heart failure or diabetes mellitus?
Does hospital discharge planning based on nursing taxonomies improve disease management knowledge in adult patients hospitalized for heart failure or diabetes mellitus?
Implementation of hospital discharge planning based on nursing taxonomies significantly improves disease management knowledge in patients with heart failure or diabetes.
May inform discharge education in HF/diabetes; hypothesis-generating and requires larger randomized confirmation.
OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the effect of implementation of hospital discharge planning based on the taxonomies of NANDA-International, nursing interventions classification (NIC) and nursing outcomes classification (NOC) for patients with heart failure (HF) or diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: quasi-experimental quantitative study conducted in a public university hospital located in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Convenience sampling included 28 adult patients hospitalized for HF or DM with the nursing diagnosis Ineffective Health Management (00078), who received the following nursing interventions: Teaching: Disease Process, Teaching: Prescribed Medication and Teaching: Prescribed Diet. Before and after the intervention, the following nursing outcomes were evaluated : Knowledge: Diabetes Management and Knowledge: Heart Failure Management. RESULTS: the score of the nursing outcome Knowledge: Heart Failure Management went from 2.05±0.28 to 2.54±0.30 (P=0.002), and of the nursing outcome Knowledge: Diabetes Management went from 2.61±0.55 to 3.21±0.57 (P=0.000). CONCLUSION: discharge planning based on the NIC improves the NOC score and may interfere in the health outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lemos et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: