PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15360840

Evaluating an ICNP Web-based nursing documentation system.

Joseph Liaskos·John Mantas
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to present the evaluation of a web based nursing documentation system which helps nursing professionals and students to study ICNP Greek beta 2 version and to create nursing diagnoses, interventions and outcomes by selecting relevant terms from ICNP. This advanced web-based ICNP browser enables the authentication of the user, and the creation of a type of nursing care plan through the use of ICNP. It provides different ways for creating nursing diagnoses, interventions and outcomes, by selecting relevant ICNP terms through the tree-structure view, index and search components of the tool. The evaluation of this nursing documentation system is carried out by a survey among nursing professionals working in nursing units in hospitals. The results which have derived from this survey are presented. Moreover, conclusions regarding the future changes that should be made in the system are reported.

Explore related subjects

Attitude to ComputersConsumer BehaviorInternational Council of NursesInternetNursing DiagnosisNursing Evaluation ResearchNursing InformaticsNursing ProcessNursing RecordsTerminology as TopicUser-Computer InterfaceVocabulary, ControlledEvaluation StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joseph Liaskos, John Mantas. 2004. Evaluating an ICNP Web-based nursing documentation system.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15360840/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Clinical computing in general dentistry.

OBJECTIVE: Measure the adoption and utilization of, opinions about, and attitudes toward clinical computing among general dentists in the United States. DESIGN: Telephone survey of a random sample of 256 general dentists in active practice in the United States. MEASUREMENTS: A 39-item telephone interview measuring practice characteristics and information technology infrastructure; clinical information storage; data entry and access; attitudes toward and opinions about clinical computing (features of practice management systems, barriers, advantages, disadvantages, and potential improvements); clinical Internet use; and attitudes toward the National Health Information Infrastructure. RESULTS: The authors successfully screened 1,039 of 1,159 randomly sampled U.S. general dentists in active practice (89.6% response rate). Two hundred fifty-six (24.6%) respondents had computers at chairside and thus were eligible for this study. The authors successfully interviewed 102 respondents (39.8%). Clinical information associated with administration and billing, such as appointments and treatment plans, was stored predominantly on the computer; other information, such as the medical history and progress notes, primarily resided on paper. Nineteen respondents, or 1.8% of all general dentists, were completely paperless. Auxiliary personnel, such as dental assistants and hygienists, entered most data. Respondents adopted clinical computing to improve office efficiency and operations, support diagnosis and treatment, and enhance patient communication and perception. Barriers included insufficient operational reliability, program limitations, a steep learning curve, cost, and infection control issues. CONCLUSION: Clinical computing is being increasingly adopted in general dentistry. However, future research must address usefulness and ease of use, workflow support, infection control, integration, and implementation issues.

Attitude to Computers↗
PubMed2006

Decision tools in health care: focus on the problem, not the solution.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews or randomised-controlled trials usually help to establish the effectiveness of drugs and other health technologies, but are rarely sufficient by themselves to ensure actual clinical use of the technology. The process from innovation to routine clinical use is complex. Numerous computerised decision support systems (DSS) have been developed, but many fail to be taken up into actual use. Some developers construct technologically advanced systems with little relevance to the real world. Others did not determine whether a clinical need exists. With NHS investing 5 billion pounds sterling in computer systems, also occurring in other countries, there is an urgent need to shift from a technology-driven approach to one that identifies and employs the most cost-effective method to manage knowledge, regardless of the technology. The generic term, 'decision tool' (DT), is therefore suggested to demonstrate that these aids, which seem different technically, are conceptually the same from a clinical viewpoint. DISCUSSION: Many computerised DSSs failed for various reasons, for example, they were not based on best available knowledge; there was insufficient emphasis on their need for high quality clinical data; their development was technology-led; or evaluation methods were misapplied. We argue that DSSs and other computer-based, paper-based and even mechanical decision aids are members of a wider family of decision tools. A DT is an active knowledge resource that uses patient data to generate case specific advice, which supports decision making about individual patients by health professionals, the patients themselves or others concerned about them. The identification of DTs as a consistent and important category of health technology should encourage the sharing of lessons between DT developers and users and reduce the frequency of decision tool projects focusing only on technology. The focus of evaluation should become more clinical, with the impact of computer-based DTs being evaluated against other computer, paper- or mechanical tools, to identify the most cost effective tool for each clinical problem. SUMMARY: We suggested the generic term 'decision tool' to demonstrate that decision-making aids, such as computerised DSSs, paper algorithms, and reminders are conceptually the same, so the methods to evaluate them should be the same.

Attitude to Computers↗
PubMed2006

Issues in data generation using email group conversations for nursing research.

AIM: The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the issues we have confronted when generating and analysing dialogue data by using electronic mail. BACKGROUND: The decision to use email for our research arose from our developing understanding of some of the consequences of illness that people living with chronic illness confront in their lives. As researchers, we recognized the potential of the Internet for computer-mediated communication using email for communication between researchers and research participants. DISCUSSION: We consider the functional aspects of generating data by email, such as the software needed, and then explore the issues encountered during the research process including ethical considerations, fluctuating participation, participants' familiarity with using email, facilitating lurkers towards participation, establishing group norms, and the role of the facilitator. CONCLUSION: As a collaborative inquiry, email conversation allowed us to spend time with participants over 2 years to explore chronic illness experience. However the scope and viability of computer-mediated communication as a qualitative method of research remains relatively unexplored, hence this paper.

Attitude to Computers↗