[New nursing diagnoses in imaging: submission to NANDA International]

The Nursing Diagnosis of risk for pressure ulcer: content validation

Objective:

to validate the content of the new nursing diagnosis, termed risk for pressure ulcer.

Method:

the content validation with a sample made up of 24 nurses who were specialists in skin care from six different hospitals in the South and Southeast of Brazil. Data collection took place electronically, through an instrument constructed using the SurveyMonkey program, containing a title, definition, and 19 risk factors for the nursing diagnosis. The data were analyzed using Fehring's method and descriptive statistics. The project was approved by a Research Ethics Committee.

Results:

title, definition and seven risk factors were validated as "very important": physical immobilization, pressure, surface friction, shearing forces, skin moisture,

alteration in sensation and malnutrition. Among the other risk factors, 11 were validated as "important": dehydration, obesity, anemia, decrease in serum albumin level, prematurity, aging, smoking, edema, impaired circulation, and decrease in oxygenation and in tissue perfusion. The risk factor of hyperthermia was discarded.

Conclusion:

the content validation of these components of the nursing diagnosis corroborated the importance of the same, being able to facilitate the nurse's clinical reasoning and guiding clinical practice in the preventive care for pressure ulcers.

Risk for adverse reaction to iodinated contrast media: a validation study

Objectives

To validate the content of the nursing diagnosis, Risk for adverse reaction to iodinated contrast media, and its nursing interventions and outcomes according to standardized terminologies.

Method

Fehring's (1987) model of diagnosis content validation was used, with the participation of experts including registered nurses and physicians.

Results

Seventy-four experts validated the title and the definition of the diagnosis, and assessed 28 risk factors, five of which were validated as primary, 22 as secondary, and one was discarded. The inclusion of the diagnosis in the NANDA International Taxonomy II was evaluated by 41 registered nurses and validated for Area II - Safety/ Protection and Class 2 - Physical Injury. Sixty-three experts validated seven nursing interventions as primary and one as secondary, and seven nursing outcomes as principal and one as minor.

Conclusion

The title, definition, and risk factors of the diagnosis were validated, in addition to eight interventions and eight nursing outcomes.