Next Article in Journal
Optimization of Micro-Pollutants’ Removal from Wastewater Using Agricultural Waste-Derived Sustainable Adsorbent
Next Article in Special Issue
Relationship between Psychological Status and Health Behaviors during the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic in Japanese Community-Dwelling Older Adults
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Musculoskeletal Injuries Sustained in Road Traffic Crashes on Work-Related Outcomes: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Recognition of Anemia in Elderly People in a Rural Community Hospital
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 18
Issue 21
10.3390/ijerph182111505
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Identifying Frequently Used NANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses, NOC Outcomes, NIC Interventions, and NNN Linkages for Nursing Home Residents in Korea

by
Juh Hyun Shin
1,*,
Gui Yun Choi
2 and
Jiyeon Lee
3
1
College of Nursing, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Korea
2
Department of Nursing, Ulsan College, Ulsan 44022, Korea
3
College of Nursing, Catholic University of Pusan, Busan 46252, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(21), 11505; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111505
Submission received: 22 September 2021 / Revised: 23 October 2021 / Accepted: 31 October 2021 / Published: 1 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue To Be Healthy for the Elderly: Long Term Care Issues around the World)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study aimed to identify the terminologies of NANDA-I, NOC, NIC, and NNN linkages that have been used for nursing home (NH) residents. This study used a retrospective descriptive design. Data accrued from 57 registered nurses (RNs) in 25 Korean NHs. The RNs randomly selected one resident and assessed for applied NANDA-I, NOC, and NIC from the previous 7 days by reviewing nursing charts and records. Finally, the data of 57 residents in 25 NHs were collected. Results: We identified seven NNN linkages: risk for falls–fall prevention behavior–fall prevention; self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene–self-care: activities of daily living (ADL)–self-care assistance: bathing/hygiene; impaired memory–memory–cognitive stimulation; chronic confusion–neurological status: consciousness–medication management; chronic confusion–memory–medication management; impaired walking–mobility–exercise promotion: strength training; and impaired walking–ambulation–exercise promotion: strength training. The identified core NANDA-I, NOC, NIC, and NNN linkages for NH residents from this study provide a scope of practice of RNs working in NHs.

1. Introduction

The nursing process is an independent clinical judgment in which a registered nurse (RN) assesses an individual’s health to diagnose actual or potential health problems [1]. The nursing process is a systematic method that allows RNs to effectively care for patients using problem solving and critical thinking [2]. The aim of the nursing process is identifying, diagnosing, and treating actual or potential human responses to disease [3]. The nursing process helps nurses make professional judgments in terms of clinical and problem-solving methods and nursing management [2,3]. A standardized nursing-languages system scientifically and efficiently applies the nursing process to individuals [3]. The standardized nursing-languages system objectively expresses and conceptualizes the phenomenon of nursing and clarifies the nursing process of individuals by using individuals’ problems in a common technical term [3,4].
The NANDA-I, NOC, and NIC are the most common standardized nursing languages systems [5]. Using NANDA-I provides the basis for selecting nursing interventions to achieve outcomes for which the RN is accountable and gives RNs a standardized language to articulate problems they encounter daily [6]. NANDA-I prioritizes the most urgent needs of the patient [7]. The NOC shows detailed outcome measurements to RNs and supplies the intermediary outcomes, which helps accomplish long-term outcomes [6,8]. The NIC is an intervention from NOC. Using NIC enables RNs to focus nursing behaviors, which helps solve the nursing problem [6,8]. Creating and using NANDA-I, NOC, NIC, and NNN linkages enables holistic nursing care appropriate for an individual’s illness/health condition [9,10]. NNN linkages assist the RN in making decisions about the outcome and intervention of care plans [11]. Through using NNN linkages, RNs continually evaluate the situation and adjust NNN to fit the unique and diverse needs of each patient [6,11]. It is easier for RNs to apply nursing languages to practice if the nursing home (NH) staff have brief and clear nursing-language linkages developed for their specific setting; the desired and suggested outcomes guide RNs toward what they should do for residents [6]. The continuity of care through standardized languages contributes to better outcomes not only for patients but also for nursing staff [4]. Using consistent standardized languages improves the quality of patient outcomes and advances nursing knowledge and practice [4,9,12].
Although standardized nursing languages systems apply in many settings (due to their importance) the systems previously focused only on individuals in acute settings [9], and few studies have described the use of language systems in NHs. NH residents are a very vulnerable population. Most residents have at least one chronic or geriatric illness, and most require constant professional nursing care in long-term-care settings [13]. Implementing standardized terminology systems in NHs improves monitoring quality, payment for residents, outcome research, and decision support [14]. Documents in NHs should include nursing-oriented standardized languages because nurses play a more independent and critical role as case managers in NHs, compared with acute settings like hospitals. However, using a standardized nursing language in an NH is very rare because NHs in Korea lack a uniform and standardized nursing-care record system. Worldwide, Korean NHs do not have a foundation in any standardized terminology system.
It is easier and more efficient for RNs to apply nursing languages to their practice if the NH staff have brief and clear nursing-language linkages developed only for their setting; the desired and suggested outcomes guide RNs toward how they should care for the residents [9]. The frequently used nursing diagnoses and interventions with desired outcomes, developed in several studies, can guide newly graduated or hired NH RNs [15]. Nursing language linkages in NHs may help RNs define the appropriate nursing interventions by nursing diagnosis and establish nursing outcomes for the elder population [14]. However, data on nursing diagnosis, intervention, outcomes, and the linkages in NHs are limited, despite the importance of a standardized nursing-languages system. This study identified the frequently used terminologies of NANDA-I, NOC, NIC, and NNN linkages that have been used for NH residents.

2. Methods

2.1. Design of the Study

This study used a retrospective descriptive design. The conceptual framework of this study is the structure–process–outcome (SPO) model developed by Unruh and Wan [16] for evaluating the quality of long-term care facilities. NANDA is classified in the structure, NIC is equivalent to the process, and NOC belongs to the outcome.

2.2. Setting and Sample

We randomly selected 140 NHs (20% of total NHs) using the random function of the Excel program and contacted NHs with RNs listed on the Korean Long-Term Care homepage operated by the Korean National Health Insurance Corporation [17]. The Korean RN-staffing regulations in NHs allow certified nursing assistants (CNAs) to replace RNs; only 700 NHs (about 21.9%) of 3200 NHs operating in 2019 employed RNs. We explained the purpose and process of this study to NH administrators and requested participation in this study by email or phone (due to COVID-19) using the e-mail address and phone number posted on the Korean Long-Term Care homepage. Administrators of 25 NHs voluntarily agreed to participate in this study. Among the agreed NHs, RNs who wished to voluntarily participate in this study were included. A total of 57 RNs from 25 NHs participated in this study. Each RN randomly selected one resident using the random-selection method. The criteria for including residents was those aged 65 or older who have been admitted for more than 6 months. We recruited RNs with more than 5 years of experience in NHs to participate. RNs who do not provide direct care to residents (i.e., educational RNs, administrative RNs) were excluded from this study. We provided financial incentives of KRW 35 for their survey completion.

2.3. Instruments

2.3.1. General Characteristics

Resident information on sex, age, resident case-mix using a Korean long-term care grading system, underlying medical conditions, and length of stay were collected through admission records.

2.3.2. NANDA-I

NANDA-I involves a clinical judgment about individual, family, or community responses to actual and potential health problems/life processes and offers the basis for choosing nursing interventions to accomplish nursing outcomes [18]. The nursing diagnoses in this study originated from 221 NANDA-I nursing diagnoses translated into Korean by Choi [19]. The diagnoses used in this study were extracted from Ackley’s book [20]. We selected 45 nursing diagnoses, building on nine previous studies of nursing diagnosis for residents of NHs. Most NANDA-I nursing diagnoses in NHs are as follows: Self-Care Deficit: Bathing/Hygiene, Self-Care Deficit: Dressing/Grooming, Impaired Physical Mobility, Altered Thought Process, and Potential for Injury [21,22]. The eight never-used NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, which do not relate to the elderly at all, were excluded from this study and are as follows: Effective Breastfeeding, Ineffective Breastfeeding, Ineffective Infant Feeding Pattern, Interrupted Breastfeeding, Potential Altered Parenting, Rape-Trauma Syndrome: Compound Reaction, and Rape-Trauma Syndrome: Silent Reaction. In addition, the 201 relative factors and 128 defining characteristics were included in each of the 45 diagnoses.

2.3.3. NOC

The NOC is an all-inclusive, standardized classification of patient/client outcomes to evaluate the effects of nursing interventions [23]. The nursing outcomes in this study originated from 385 nursing outcomes developed by the University of Iowa research team translated into Korean by Choi [19]. The outcomes used in this study were extracted from Ackley’s book [20]. We selected 79 nursing outcomes to construct the survey, building on the previous nine studies of nursing outcomes for residents in NHs. Most NOCs in the previous NH study are as follows: bowel elimination, urinary elimination, memory, health-promoting behavior, and neurological status: consciousness [9].

2.3.4. NIC

The NIC is defined as any direct-care treatment an RN performs on behalf of a client. The nursing interventions in this study originated from 211 NIC developed by the University of Iowa research team translated into Korean by Choi [19]. The interventions used in this study were extracted from Ackley’s book [20]. We selected 82 nursing interventions to construct the survey, building on the previous nine studies of nursing interventions for residents in NHs. In previous studies, the core NIC interventions included active listening, behavior management, caregiver support, communication enhancement, and confusion management [24]. Two nursing professors with clinical experience in NHs and NH investigation selected and screened nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions. Among the two professors, the first researcher (a professor who has clinical experience in NHs and whose main research field is NHs) selected nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions from the previous nine studies of NHs. The second researcher (a professor focusing on geriatric care, and a policy expert in long-term care) screened the selected nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions for NH applicability, and analyzed the possibility of further applicable nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions. Finally, we used 45 nursing diagnoses, 79 nursing outcomes, and 82 nursing interventions in the study’s questionnaire.

2.4. Method of Data Collection

We collected data from January to February 2020 after the institutional review board of a university in Korea approved the study (Approval No. XX-202001-0002-01). We visited the NHs (or sent information by mail to NHs that refused visits due to COVID-19) and explained the purpose and procedure of the study to the RNs and obtained consent forms. We explained the definition, purpose, and brief history of nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions using a booklet and how we developed questionnaires before providing the survey so RNs had no difficulty filling out the questionnaire. RNs selected one resident (one resident for one RN) using a random sampling method by using excel program and referred to the resident’s RN records from the previous 7 days to complete the questionnaire. RNs were asked to mark “Applied for nursing diagnosis, intervention, and outcome applied for 7 days and “Not Applied if it was not applied. RNs provided information on residents’ general characteristics from the admission records. For the interrater reliability of the data, two RNs independently checked nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions on the questionnaire. If they chose different nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions, they were unified into one after the two RNs discussed their findings. This process secured the reliability between the observers.

2.5. Data Analysis

We analyzed data using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows Version 25.0. (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). We analyzed the general characteristics of NH residents using numbers and percentages. We analyzed the frequency of nursing diagnoses, interventions, and outcomes among the NH residents by numbers and percentages. Researchers linked NNN standardized languages. We integrated NNN association linkages by combining NIC (year) and NOC (year) taxonomies, in terms of the analogous domains and classes. We started with the NANDA-1 as an outline followed by the NIC and NOC. The whole process is parallel to the nursing process [25].

3. Results

3.1. General Characteristics of Residents in NHs

Table 1 provides a descriptive analysis of the 57 residents in 21 NHs. Residents were predominantly female (42; 74%), their mean age was 85.19 years (SD = 6.38), and the average length of stay was 3 years and 1 month (SD = 40.36 months). Of residents, 40.3% were third grade long-term-care beneficiaries (residents who are partially dependent for activities of daily living (ADLs)). Residents diagnosed with dementia totaled 94.7%; 68.4% were diagnosed with high blood pressure, 31.4% with diabetes, and 29.8% with a neurological disease.

3.2. Most Frequently-Used NANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses, NOC Outcomes, and NIC Interventions in NHs

Table 2 shows the top 30 NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, relative factors, and defining characteristics NHs most frequently used. The most frequent nursing diagnosis was risk for falls (applied to 49 of 57 residents), and the most relative factor was residents over 65 years of age. The second most frequent nursing diagnosis was self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene; the highest relative factor for self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene (applied to 44 residents) indicated cognitive impairment, and the defining characteristic was the inability to wash oneself. The third most frequent nursing diagnosis was impaired memory; the highest relative factor for impaired memory (applied to 41 residents) was a neurological problem, and the defining characteristic was that no action was taken. The fourth most frequent nursing diagnosis was chronic confusion (applied to 41 residents); the highest relative factor for chronic confusion was Alzheimer’s disease, and the defining characteristic was short-term memory loss. The fifth most frequent nursing diagnosis was impaired walking (applied to 39 residents); the highest relative factor for impaired walking was insufficient muscle strength, and the defining characteristic was the inability to walk a required distance.
Table 3 describes the top 30 NOC outcomes NHs most frequently used. The most frequently applied NOC outcome was vital signs. This outcome was applied to most residents (56 out of 57). The second and third most frequently applied NOC outcomes were comfort status and nutritional status: nutrient intake, separately applied to 51 residents. The fourth and fifth most frequently applied NOC outcomes were oral hygiene and fall-prevention behavior, separately applied to 50 residents.
Table 3 also shows the top 30 NIC interventions most frequently used in NHs. The most frequently applied NIC intervention was medication management. This intervention was applied to most residents (56 out of 57). The second most frequently applied NIC intervention was vital-signs monitoring, applied to 55 residents. The third most frequently applied NIC intervention was environment management: comfort. This intervention was applied to 54 residents. The fourth most frequently applied NIC intervention was fall prevention, applied to 53 residents. Surveillance: safety was the fifth most frequently applied nursing intervention, applied to 52 residents.

3.3. Linkages of Nursing Diagnoses, Outcomes, and Interventions in NHs

Table 4 shows the top seven NNN linkages for residents in NHs. Two thousand nine hundred fifty-eight different NNN linkages were used for residents in NHs. The seven most commonly used NNN linkages are as follows: risk for falls–fall prevention behavior–fall prevention; self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene–self-care: ADL–self-care assistance: bathing/hygiene; impaired memory–memory–cognitive stimulation; chronic confusion–neurological status: consciousness–medication management; chronic confusion–memory–medication management; impaired walking–mobility–exercise promotion: strength training; and impaired walking–ambulation–exercise promotion: strength training.
For risk for falls, we selected one NOC outcome—fall prevention behavior—and the most frequently used NIC interventions included fall prevention and surveillance: safety. For the self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene, we selected one NOC outcome—self-care: ADL, and the most frequently used NIC intervention was self-care assistance: bathing/hygiene. For impaired memory, we selected one NOC outcome—memory—and the most frequently used interventions included active listening and memory training. For chronic confusion, the most frequently used NOC outcomes included neurological status: consciousness, and memory. Medication management, vital-signs monitoring, surveillance: safety, environment management: safety, and dementia management were the most frequently selected interventions for the nursing outcome of neurological status: consciousness. Medication management, cognitive stimulation, and memory training were the most frequently selected interventions for the nursing outcome of memory. For impaired walking, we selected two NOC outcomes—mobility and ambulation—and the most frequently used corresponding interventions included exercise promotion: strength training, and exercise therapy: joint mobility.

4. Discussion

This study is quite meaningful because a specialized NNN linkage was developed by linking NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, NOC outcomes, and NIC interventions with high frequency only for NH residents. We identified the most frequently used NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, NOC outcomes, and NIC interventions and the links between nursing languages in Korean NHs.
The most prevalent NANDA-I nursing diagnoses included risk for falls (86.0%) and impaired walking (78.0%), which led to a decreased ability to ambulate and limited the performance of ADLs. Consistent with previous data [14], the professional management of falls is a top priority in NHs because NH residents are vulnerable to falls. The prevalence of falls in global NHs is 24.9%–37.3% [26,27] and approximately 25.2% of Korean NH residents have fallen [28]. NH residents are vulnerable to falls due to old age. Aging causes a decrease in muscle strength and tendon elasticity [29]. We found insufficient muscle strength is the factor most relative to impaired walking. Increased risk for falls and reduced ability to walk reduces opportunities for individuals to participate in functional physical activities necessary to perform self-care, leading to a loss of muscular strength and triggering a vicious circle of inactivity and weakness [30]. Beyond aging factors, a higher proportion of RNs in NHs and greater RN hours per resident day align with a decreased risk of fall injuries [28,31] because RNs play a key role in fall prevention. In NHs, RNs assess fall-risk factors (e.g., physical restraints or urination problems), remove fall-risk factors, create a fall-prevention environment (e.g., bedside arrangement or raising the bed railing), and distribute the role of nursing assistants to prevent falls [32]. Therefore, appropriate levels of RN staffing must be secured for fall prevention.
Bathing is the ADL with the highest disability incidence in older people. This diagnosis was used at a high frequency in preceding studies [11]. This diagnosis relates to the sequential order of ADL decline. First, elders lose their ability to bathe independently; second, they lose their mobility independence; and third, their ability to eat independently [11]. Bathing aids body hygiene and skin integrity, which are vital to the prevention of disease. Furthermore, NH residents’ daily activities, such as bathing, positively impact their quality of life [33]. Despite these positive effects, NH residents do not take a bath for reasons including disability or depression [34]. RNs in NHs are responsible for assessing which difficulties residents have with bathing, planning a resident’s bathing activities, encouraging residents to take a bath, and assigning nursing staff to assist residents in taking a bath [34]. Greater RN hours per resident day associate with increased resident bathing [35].
Dementia management is another priority among nursing care, as it causes irreversible changes in cerebral function, memory disorders, roles, and daily activities [36]. Accordingly, impaired memory and chronic confusion are prevalent nursing diagnoses in this stimulation and were applied at high frequency for residents as an intervention for impaired memory. RNs can identify cognitive deficits through a mental status examination, and plan and provide cognitive-improvement programs for residents [37]. For example, RNs can provide one cognitive-stimulation intervention (enriched living environments that contain a wide array of personal memorable and memory-stimulating cues) to potentially support NH residents’ cognitive functioning [38,39]. An enriched environment provides items to simulate residents in meaningful ways. An enriched environment includes making residents’ rooms more homelike, preserving a sense of self, stimulating autobiographical memory, and helping residents recall current and past relationships [39]. In this study, chronic confusion in residents was applied with high frequency and the highest frequency of intervention in chronic confusion was medication management. A higher ratio of RNs to CNAs and a higher number of RN hours per resident day equate to a lower number of patients with chronic confusion [40]. Nursing staff have difficulty assessing chronic confusion [41]. Due to this characteristic, interventions for chronic confusion are not adequately conducted [41]. However, RNs receive more extensive clinical training and education on problem-solving skills compared to other nursing staff. With this training and education, RNs have tacit and articulable knowledge to better assess chronic confusion in NH residents [40]. Therefore, appropriate levels of RN staffing should be performed for chronic confusion management.
Walking ability is fundamental to independence [42]. Impaired walking is a strong indicator for admitting a person to a NH [43]. Impaired walking causes disabilities, falls, and fractures. Therefore, strength training is necessary for NH residents to prevent further disabilities and falls [44].
Using a standardized nursing language in NHs has numerous benefits. First, a standardized nursing language enhances communication among nursing staff, healthcare professionals, and administrators of institutions [45]. Effective communication is necessary when healthcare practitioners transfer work in a NH, or when residents move to another NH, hospital, or emergency room. A standardized nursing language improves communication and enhances resident care by facilitating seamless communication between healthcare practitioners. Second, a standardized nursing language increases the visibility of nursing interventions [46]. The public do not know exactly what care RNs perform, thereby making it difficult to understand RNs’ professional nursing practices. RNs do not use a standardized nursing language and have a long tradition of overreliance on communicating information through word-of-mouth [46,47]. A standardized nursing language helps highlight the contribution of NH RNs to resident outcomes, thus enhancing nursing visibility. A standardized nursing language enables RNs to describe the unique role of the RN. Third, a standardized nursing language enables RNs to provide optimal and exact nursing interventions to residents. When a specific nursing diagnosis is given to a resident, RNs can quickly understand the standards of care through a standardized nursing language. Therefore, providing a standardized nursing language is needed when educating nursing students [15]. A standardized nursing language can improve residents’ quality of care by promoting communication among the nursing staff and thereby standardize nursing practices. Considering these benefits, NHs must use the NNN developed in this study.
A limitation of this study includes that a 1-week review of the RN record was limiting due to the 4-month grant period, which was not a long enough for data collection. Additionally, the number of subjects (RNs) and residents selected by the RNs included in this study is small to reflect whole NH residents. In future studies, it is necessary to secure a sufficient data-collection period and increase the number of nursing records of residents reviewed per RN. Third, the understanding of nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions is different for each RN due to differences in competency, including education level and understanding of nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions. Therefore, we only included RNs with more than 5 years of clinical experience in NHs for this study. Despite these limitations, this study was very valuable because it is one of the first trials conducted with RNs in NHs and can be identified by most frequently applying which nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions RNs perform. Based on this NNN linkage, future studies must be conducted on whether linkages are valid for various NHs throughout the country.

5. Conclusions and Practice Implications

We identified nursing diagnoses, outcomes, interventions, and NNN linkages applied in NHs. Standardized nursing languages for nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and interventions in NHs provide a common language for communication, evidence of the unique and professional roles of RNs, and educational material for newly graduated or hired NH RNs. A standardized nursing language enables RNs to provide optimal and exact nursing interventions to residents. In conclusion, the identified core NANDA-I, NOC, NIC, and NNN linkages for NH residents from this study provide a scope of practice of RNs working in NHs. The linkage can be applied to RNs’ independent activities with nursing languages to solve the potential or possible risk problems. Therefore, preparing and supporting RNs to plan, perform individualized nursing on identified problems, and evaluate resident responses on the basis of a standardized nursing language is essential. These efforts lead to improved quality of care for NH residents.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; methodology, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; software, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; validation, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; formal analysis, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; investigation, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; resources, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; data curation, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; writing—original draft preparation, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; writing—review and editing, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; visualization, J.H.S., G.Y.C. and J.L.; supervision, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; project administration, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; funding acquisition, J.H.S. and G.Y.C.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Korean Nurse Association. This research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (Grants 2021R1A2C2007104).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of Ewha Womans University (Approval No. XX-202001-0002-01).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not available.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lynn, P. Taylor’s Clinical Nursing Skills: A Nursing Process Approach; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Shewangizaw, Z.; Mersha, A. Determinants towards implementation of nursing process. Am. J. Nurs. Sci. 2015, 4, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Melo, R.; Rua, M.; Santos, C. Support and training of family caregivers: Nursing intervention program. Millenium 2018, 2, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Törnvall, E.; Jansson, I. Preliminary evidence for the usefulness of standardized nursing terminologies in different fields of application: A literature review. Int. J. Nurs. Knowl. 2017, 28, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tastan, S.; Linch, G.; Keenan, G.M.; Stifter, J.; McKinney, D.; Fahey, L.; Lopez, K.D.; Yao, Y.; Wilkie, D.J. Evidence for the existing American RNs Association-recognized standardized nursing terminologies: A systematic review. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2014, 51, 1160–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Lucena, A.D.F.; Argenta, C.; Almeida, M.D.A.; Moorhead, S.; Swanson, E. Validation of nursing outcomes and interventions to older adults care with risk or frail elderly syndrome: Proposal of linkages among NOC, NIC, and NANDA-I to clinical practice. Int. J. Nurs. Knowl. 2019, 30, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Larijani, T.; Saatchi, B. Training of NANDA-I nursing diagnoses (NDs), nursing interventions classification (NIC) and nursing outcomes classification (NOC), in psychiatric wards: A randomized controlled trial. Nurs. Open 2019, 6, 612–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Moorhead, S. Ten paths to data-driven care using NIC and NOC. Nurse Lead. 2019, 17, 522–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gencbas, D.; Bebis, H.; Cicek, H. Evaluation of the efficiency of the nursing care plan applied using NANDA, NOC, and NIC linkages to elderly women with incontinence living in a nursing home: A randomized controlled study. Int. J. Nurs. Knowl. 2018, 29, 217–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Johnson, M.; Jefferies, D.; Nicholls, D. Developing a minimum data set for electronic nursing handover. J. Clin. Nurs. 2012, 21, 331–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bebiş, H.; Moorhead, S.; Gençbaş, D.; Özdemir, S.; Seven, M. NOC/NIC linkages to NANDA-I for continence care of elderly people with urinary incontinence in Nursing Homes: A systematic review. Florence Nightingale Hemşirelik Dergisi 2019, 27, 284–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Vázquez-Sánchez, M.Á.; Valero-Cantero, I.; Carrión-Velasco, Y.; Castro-López, P.; Suárez-Cadenas, E.; Casals, C. Applicability and clinical validity of nursing outcomes classification in a nursing intervention of nutritional counseling for patients with malnutrition. Int. J. Nurs. Knowl. 2018, 30, 168–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kovaleva, M.; Clevenger, C.; Svensson, B.; Wright, P.; Davis, P.; Hepburn, K. A nursing home resident with somatic and psychiatric multimorbidity. J. Nurse Pract. 2018, 14, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Güler, E.K.; Eşer, İ.; Khorshid, L.; Yücel, Ş.Ç. Nursing diagnoses in elderly residents of a nursing home: A case in Turkey. Nurs. Outlook 2012, 60, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Adubi, I.O.; Olaogun, A.A.; Adejumo, P.O. Effect of standardized nursing language continuing education programme on RNs’ documentation of care at University College Hospital, Ibadan. Nurs. Open 2018, 5, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Unruh, L.; Wan, T.T. A systems framework for evaluating nursing care quality in nursing homes. J. Med. Syst. 2004, 28, 197–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Korean National Health Insurance Corporation. Long Term Care Insurance. Available online: http://www.longtermcare.or.kr/npbs/d/m/000/moveBoardView?menuId=npe0000000950&bKey=B0019&search_boardId=50126 (accessed on 18 October 2021).
  18. Rabelo-Silva, E.R.; Dantas Cavalcanti, A.C.; Ramos Goulart Caldas, M.C.; Lucena, A.D.F.; Almeida, M.D.A.; Linch, G.F.D.C.; da Silva, M.B.; Müller-Staub, M. Advanced nursing process quality: Comparing the international classification for nursing practice (ICNP) with the NANDA-International (NANDA-I) and nursing interventions classification (NIC). J. Clin. Nurs. 2017, 26, 379–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Choi, S.H. Major Nursing Diagnoses and Nursing Interventions; Jungmungak: Seoul, Korea, 2015; pp. 1–155. [Google Scholar]
  20. Ackley, B.J.; Ladwig, G.B.; Makic, M.B.; Martinez-Kratz, M.; Zanotti, M. Nursing Diagnosis Handbook: An Evidence-Based Guide to Planning Care; Elsevier: St. Louis, MO, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  21. Daly, J.M.; Maas, M.; Buckwalter, K. Use of standardized nursing diagnoses and interventions in long-term care. J. Gerontol. Nurs. 1995, 21, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hardy, M.A.; Maas, M.; Akins, J. The prevalence of nursing diagnoses among elderly and long term care residents: A descriptive comparison. Recent Adv. Nurs. 1988, 21, 144–158. [Google Scholar]
  23. Moorhead, S.; Johnson, M.; Maas, M.L.; Swanson, E. Nursing Outcomes Classification (NOC)-E-Book: Measurement of Health Outcomes; Elsevier Health Sciences: St. Louis, MO, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bulechek, G.M.; McCloskey, J.C.; Titler, M.G.; Denehey, J.A. Currents in practice: Report on the NIC project: Nursing interventions used in practice. Am. J. Nurs. 1994, 94, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Krogh, G.V.; Dale, C.; Nåden, D. A Framework for integrating NANDA, NIC, and NOC terminology in electronic patient records. J. Nurs. Scholarsh. 2005, 37, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Carryer, J.; Weststrate, J.; Yeung, P.; Rodgers, V.; Towers, A.; Jones, M. Prevalence of key care indicators of pressure injuries, incontinence, malnutrition, and falls among older adults living in nursing homes in New Zealand. Res. Nurs. Health 2017, 40, 555–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Castaldo, A.; Giordano, A.; Incalzi, R.A.; Lusignani, M. Risk factors associated with accidental falls among Italian nursing home residents: A longitudinal study (FRAILS). Geriatr. Nurs. 2019, 41, 75–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shin, J.H.; Hyun, T.K. RN staffing and quality of care of nursing home residents in Korea. J. Nurs. Scholarsh. 2015, 47, 555–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Özbek, Z.; Öner, P.; Biyokimya Laboratuvarı, İ. Biochemical and physiological changes of aging. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Dergisi 2008, 6, 73–80. [Google Scholar]
  30. Marques-Vieira, C.M.A.; Sousa, L.M.M.D.; Carias, J.F.D.M.M.; Caldeira, S.M.A. Nursing diagnosis “impaired walking” in elderly patients: Integrative literature review. Rev. Gauch. Enferm. 2015, 36, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Zimmermann, J.; Swora, M.; Pfaff, H.; Zank, S. Organizational factors of fall injuries among residents within German nursing homes: Secondary analyses of cross-sectional data. Eur. J. Ageing 2019, 16, 503–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cho, I.; Kim, J.; Chae, J.; Jung, M.; Kim, Y.H. Comparison of content coverage of domestic and international inpatient falls prevention guidelines using standard nursing terminologies. Korean J. Adult Nurs. 2018, 30, 622–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chan, C.; Slaughter, S.; Jones, C.; Wagg, A. Greater independence in activities of daily living is associated with higher health-related quality of life scores in nursing home residents with dementia. Healthcare 2015, 3, 503–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. den Ouden, M.; Bleijlevens, M.H.C.; Meijers, J.M.M.; Zwakhalen, S.M.G.; Braun, S.M.; Tan, F.E.S.; Hamers, J.P.H. Daily (in)activities of nursing home residents in their wards: An observation study. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2015, 16, 963–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kuk, N.O.; den Ouden, M.; Zijlstra, G.R.; Hamers, J.P.; Kempen, G.I.; Bours, G.J. Do nursing staff encourage functional activity among nursing home residents? A cross-sectional study of nursing staff perceived behaviors and associated factors. BMC Geriatr. 2017, 17, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Livingston, G.; Huntley, J.; Sommerlad, A.; Ames, D.; Ballard, C.; Banerjee, S.; Brayne, C.; Burns, A.; Cohen-Mansfield, J.; Cooper, C.; et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 2017, 390, 2673–2734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Kutschar, P.; Berger, S.; Brandauer, A.; Freywald, N.; Osterbrink, J.; Seidenspinner, D.; Gnass, I. Nursing education intervention effects on pain intensity of nursing home residents with different levels of cognitive impairment: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. J. Pain Res. 2020, 13, 633–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Andrew, A.; McKay, A.F.; Ritchie, L. Staff perspectives of a café on the premises of an aged care facility. Gerontol. Geriatr. Stud. 2018, 8, 43–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kris, A.E.; Henkel, L.A. The presence of memory-enriched environments for cognitively impaired nursing home residents. J. Hous. Elder. 2019, 33, 393–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Weech-Maldonado, R.; Meret-Hanke, L.; Neff, M.C.; Mor, V. RN staffing patterns and quality of care in nursing homes. Health Care Manag. Rev. 2004, 29, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Sampaio, F.M.; Sequeira, C. RNs’ knowledge and practices in cases of acute and chronic confusion: A questionnaire survey. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care 2015, 51, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Marques-Vieira, C.M.A.; Sousa, L.M.M.D.; Sousa, L.M.R.D.; Berenger, S.M.A.C. The nursing diagnosis “impaired walking” in elderly: Systematic literature review. Texto Contexto-Enferm. 2016, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Schrack, J.A.; Simonsick, E.M.; Ferrucci, L. The energetic pathway to mobility loss: An emerging new framework for longitudinal studies on aging. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2010, 58, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Johnen, B.; Schott, N. Feasibility of a machine vs free weight strength training program and its effects on physical performance in nursing home residents: A pilot study. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2018, 30, 819–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chae, S.; Oh, H.; Moorhead, S. Effectiveness of Nursing Interventions Based on Nursing Outcomes Using Standardized Nursing Languages: An Integrative Review. In Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA, 3–7 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
  46. Rutherford, M. Standardized nursing language: What does it mean for nursing practice. Online J. Issues Nurs. 2008, 13, 243–250. [Google Scholar]
  47. National Health Insurance Service. Available online: http://www.khiss.go.kr/board/view?pageNum=1&rowCnt=10&no1=260&linkId=175347&menuId=MENU00309&schType=0&schText=&boardStyle=&categoryId=&continent=&schStartChar=&schEndChar=&country= (accessed on 18 October 2021).
Table
Table 1. Residents’ General Characteristics (n = 57).
Table 1. Residents’ General Characteristics (n = 57).
VariablesCategoriesn%M ± SDRange
Age (years) 85.19 ± 6.3867–98
SexMale1526.0
Female4274.0
Long-term care grade1 a814.0
2 b1221.1
3 c2340.3
4 d1322.8
5 e11.8
Length of stay (month) 37.26 ± 40.361–245
HistoryHypertension3968.4
Diabetes1831.6
Thyroid58.8
Cardiac disease814.0
Respiratory disease47.0
Neurological disease1729.8
Dementia5494.7
Arthritis915.8
Osteoporosis1119.3
Parkinson’s disease58.8
Note. a = a person who is in complete need of other people’s help in everyday life; b = a person who needs the help of others in much of everyday life; c = a person who partially needs the help of others in everyday life; d = a person who needs help in some part of everyday life; e = dementia.
Table
Table 2. Frequency of Top 30 NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, related factors, and defining characteristics.
Table 2. Frequency of Top 30 NANDA-I nursing diagnoses, related factors, and defining characteristics.
RankNANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses
(n = 1007)		n%Related Factorsn%Defining Characteristicsn%
1Risk for falls4986.0Age > 652959.1—
2Self-care deficit: bathing/hygiene4477.2Cognitive impairment2352.2Inability to wash oneself2454.5
3Impaired memory4171.9Neurological problem2151.2Unknown action taken2151.2
4Chronic confusion4171.9Alzheimer’s disease2253.7Short-term memory loss2151.2
5Impaired walking3968.4Insufficient muscle strength2153.8Unable to walk the required distance1948.7
6Constipation3561.4Lack of physical activity 2160.0Non-formal symptoms seen in the elderly1337.1
7Risk for infection3459.6Chronic disease2058.8—
8Ineffective health maintenance3459.6Cognitive impairment1750.0Personal damage support system1235.3
9Impaired physical mobility3459.6Reduced muscle control1647.1Restricted ROM1338.2
10Powerlessness3357.9Powerless lifestyle1751.5Depression1339.4
11Activity intolerance3256.1General weakness1753.1Exercise delay1031.2
12Risk for constipation3154.4Insufficient physical activity1651.6—
13Sedentary lifestyle2950.9Lack of interest 1241.4Physical weakness1344.8
14Impaired urinary elimination2747.4Various factors 1451.9Urinary incontinence1140.7
15Anxiety2747.4Threat or change1140.7Sleep disorder725.9
16Impaired verbal communication2747.4Perception disorder1659.3Difficult to understand communication1348.1
17Functional urinary incontinence2645.6Cognitive impairment1453.8Urination before arriving in the bathroom726.9
18Risk for peripheral neurovascular dysfunction2645.6Not moving1246.2—
19Risk for impaired skin integrity2645.6Stool1246.2—
20Chronic pain2442.1Chronic physical disability1458.3Pain appeal1041.7
21Self-care deficit: feeding2442.1Cognitive impairment1354.2Unable to swallow food1041.7
22Impaired bed mobility2238.6- Unable to change body position in bed1150.0
23Disturbed sleep pattern2136.8Sleep partnership733.3Normal sleep type changed628.6
24Acute pain2035.1Damaging factor 210.0Face expression 840.0
25Impaired adjustment2035.1Pessimistic1050.0—
26Risk for loneliness1933.3Physical isolation633.3—
27Stress urinary incontinence1729.8Degenerative changes in pelvic muscle1058.8Urination without the contraction of the urinary muscle 952.9
28Bowel incontinence1729.8Loss of anal sphincter control952.9Unrecognized desire to defecate847.1
29Risk for disuse syndrome1729.8Unable to move one’s body952.9—
30Disturbed sensory perception: visual1628.1Illusion956.3Loss of cognition 956.3
Table
Table 3. Frequency of Top 30 NOC outcomes and NIC interventions.
Table 3. Frequency of Top 30 NOC outcomes and NIC interventions.
RankNOC Outcome (n = 2603)n%NIC Intervention (n = 2955)n%
1Vital Signs5698.2Medication Management5698.2
2Comfort status5189.5Vital Signs Monitoring5596.5
3Nutritional Status: Nutrient Intake5189.5Environment Management: Comfort5494.7
4Oral Hygiene5087.7Fall Prevention5393.0
5Fall Prevention Behavior5087.7Surveillance: Safety5291.2
6Communication: Expressive4986.0Cognitive Stimulation5291.2
7Personal Well-Being4578.9Environment Management: Safety5291.2
8Communication: Receptive4578.9Teaching: Prescribed Medication5189.5
9Psychosocial Adjustment: Life Change4477.2Oral Health Maintenance5189.5
10Personal Safety Behavior4375.4Nutrition Management5189.5
11Social Support4273.7Self-care Assistance: Dressing/Grooming5189.5
12Appetite4273.7Bowel Management5087.7
13Risk Control4273.7Mood Management5087.7
14Health Promoting Behavior4171.9Emotional Support5087.7
15Joint Movement4171.9Infection Control4986.0
16Balance4171.9Exercise promotion: Strength Training 4884.2
17Neurological Status: Consciousness4070.2Temperature Regulation4884.2
18Self-Care: Eating4070.2Body Mechanics Promotion4884.2
19Skeletal Function3968.4Exercise Therapy: Joint Mobility4782.5
20Bowel Elimination3968.4Self-care Assistance: Bathing/Hygiene4782.5
21Anxiety Level3968.4Dementia Management4782.5
22Nutritional Status: Food & Fluid Intake3968.4Support System Enhancement4680.7
23Symptom Control3968.4Skin Surveillance4578.9
24Thermoregulation3968.4Hope Instillation4578.9
25Body Positioning: Self-Initiated3968.4Coping Enhancement4578.9
26Mobility3866.7Nutritional Monitoring4477.2
27Self-care: Activities of Daily Living (ADLs)3866.7Activity Therapy4477.2
28Tissue Integrity: Skin & Mucous Membranes3866.7Infection Protection4477.2
29Ambulation 3866.7Memory Training4375.4
30Memory3764.0Exercise therapy: Ambulation4375.4
Table
Table 4. 7 NNN linkages frequently used in NHs.
Table 4. 7 NNN linkages frequently used in NHs.
NANADA-I Nursing DiagnosesNOC OutcomeNIC Intervention
1Risk for fallsFall prevention behaviorFall prevention
2Self-care deficit: bathing/hygieneSelf-care:
Activities of Daily Living (ADLs)		Self-care Assistance: bathing/hygiene
3Impaired memoryMemoryCognitive stimulation
4Chronic confusionNeurological status: consciousnessMedication management
5Chronic confusionMemory Medication management
6Impaired walkingMobility Exercise promotion: strength training
7Impaired walkingAmbulation Exercise promotion: strength training
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shin, J.H.; Choi, G.Y.; Lee, J. Identifying Frequently Used NANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses, NOC Outcomes, NIC Interventions, and NNN Linkages for Nursing Home Residents in Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111505

AMA Style

Shin JH, Choi GY, Lee J. Identifying Frequently Used NANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses, NOC Outcomes, NIC Interventions, and NNN Linkages for Nursing Home Residents in Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(21):11505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111505

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shin, Juh Hyun, Gui Yun Choi, and Jiyeon Lee. 2021. "Identifying Frequently Used NANDA-I Nursing Diagnoses, NOC Outcomes, NIC Interventions, and NNN Linkages for Nursing Home Residents in Korea" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 21: 11505. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111505

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop