Quality of the documentation of the Nursing process in clinical decision support systems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.4510.3426Keywords:
Clinical Decision Support Systems, Nursing Process, Standardized Nursing Terminology, Electronic Health Records, Nursing Informatics, Biological Technology AssessmentAbstract
Objective: to compare the quality of the Nursing process documentation in two versions of a clinical decision support system. Method: a quantitative and quasi-experimental study of the before-and-after type. The instrument used to measure the quality of the records was the Brazilian version of the Quality of Diagnoses, Interventions and Outcomes, which has four domains and a maximum score of 58 points. A total of 81 records were evaluated in version I (pre-intervention), as well as 58 records in version II (post-intervention), and the scores obtained in the two applications were compared. The interventions consisted of planning, pilot implementation of version II of the system, training and monitoring of users. The data were analyzed in the R software, using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: the mean obtained at the pre-intervention moment was 38.24 and, after the intervention, 46.35 points. There was evidence of statistical difference between the means of the pre- and post-intervention groups, since the p-value was below 0.001 in the four domains evaluated. Conclusion: the quality of the documentation of the Nursing process in version II of the system was superior to version I. The efficacy of the system and the effectiveness of the interventions were verified. This study can contribute to the quality of documentation, care management, visibility of nursing actions and patient safety.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
