Author:
Larjow Eugenia,von Fintel Madlen,Busse Annette
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Several approaches to nursing documentation exist. Some address standardised terminology and daily monitoring, whereas the structural model approach focuses on open-ended text information and special incidents. This study aims to identify quality differences between available documentation approaches from the perspectives of nursing professionals in Germany.
Methods
Between October 2018 and May 2019, a convenience sample of German nursing home practitioners was surveyed concerning the quality of their documentation techniques. The quality measurement was developed from the findings of a literature review on indicators that define successful nursing documentation. Selected indicators were structured according to Donabedian’s quality dimensions of structure, process, and outcome. A mean score was calculated for each quality dimension. Non-parametric tests were employed to discover whether organisational and person-related conditions affect score values. The framework method was used to analyse textual data.
Results
Responses from 250 nursing care practitioners show significant differences between users of different documentation approaches in the outcome dimension. Nurses who worked with the structural model were slightly more satisfied with their documentation approach than users of other approaches. In addition, differences between subgroups were identified depending on the mode of the tools employed for nursing documentation, participation in training, and length of time spent using the present documentation tool. Qualitative data reveal that digitalisation, unequal task distribution, and appreciation and motivation are critical topics in nursing homes.
Conclusions
The results indicate that regular opportunities to reflect on challenges in documentation activities might increase nurses’ perceptions of documentation as a valuable part of nursing care. Training might serve this purpose for users of non-structural model approaches. Regardless of the specific recording techniques employed, more investment in digital infrastructure is required.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference27 articles.
1. Wolf-Ostermann K, Langer G, Bratan T, Seibert K, Hanf M, Richter C, et al. Evaluation der Effizienzsteigerung der Pflegedokumentation SV16-9002 (EvaSIS). Abschlussbericht im Auftrag des GKV-Spitzenverbandes. 2017. https://www.gkv-spitzenverband.de/media/dokumente/pflegeversicherung/forschung/projekte_unterseiten/evasis/2017-09_EvaSIS_Abschlussbericht.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2020.
2. Meißner A, Schnepp W. Staff experiences within the implementation of computer-based nursing records in residential aged care facilities: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-54.
3. Urquhart C, Currell R, Grant MJ, Hardiker NR. Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002099.pub3.
4. Urquhart C, Currell R. Reviewing the evidence on nursing record systems. Health Inform J. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458205050683.
5. De Groot K, Triemstra M, Paans W, Francke AL. Quality criteria, instruments, and requirements for nursing documentation: a systematic review of systematic reviews. J Adv Nurs. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13919.