Perbandingan Antara Diagnosis yang Sering Ditegakkan dan Possible Diagnosis yang Diprediksikan oleh Perawat Pada Klien dengan Gangguan Jiwa

https://doi.org/10.22146/jkkk.29011

Intansari Nurjannah(1*), Dewi Retno Pamungkas(2), Sri Warsini(3)

(1) Departemen Keperawatan Jiwa dan Komunitas, Fakultas Kedokteran, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(2) Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Keperawatan Akhmad Yani, Yogyakarta
(3) Departemen Keperawatan Jiwa dan Komunitas, Fakultas Kedokteran, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Background: There is not enough information related to the accuracy of nursing and collaborative diagnoses established by nurses in psychiatric setting in Indonesia.
Objective: The objective of this study was to identify the correspondence between nursing and collaborative diagnoses established and predicted by nurses.
Methods: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study which employed 81 nurse respondents. Data were collected in 2013 using two types of questionnaires. The rst questionnaire was used to identify the most frequent nursing and collaborative diagnoses encountered by the nurses. The second questionnaire was used to identify data which were most frequently identi ed by the nurses. The second questionnaire was developed based on the sequence in the Intan’s Screening Diagnosis Assessment (ISDA).
Results: The results indicated that there were 46 nursing diagnosis labels established by the nurses. Of the 46 nursing diagnosis labels, only 13 (28.26%) corresponded precisely to the labels in North American Nursing Diagnoses Association (NANDA) taxonomy (2012-2014) of nursing diagnoses. As many as 11 diagnoses (23.91%) could be included as key concepts (or diagnostic foci) in NANDA taxonomy. However, these nursing diagnosis labels did not written correctly as in NANDA labels. There were also 22 diagnosis (47%) labels not listed in NANDA taxonomy.
Conclusion: The majority of nursing diagnosis labels did not match with nursing diagnosis labels in NANDA taxonomy.

 

ABSTRAK

Latar belakang: Belum banyak informasi terkait akurasi diagnosis keperawatan dan kolaboratif yang dibuat perawat dalam setting keperawatan jiwa di Indonesia.
Tujuan: Tujuan dari peneltian ini untuk mengidenti kasi kesesuaian antara diagnosis keperawatan dan kolaboratif yang sudah ditegakkan dan yang diduga oleh perawat. Metode: Penelitian ini menggunakan rancangan cross sectional yang melibatkan 81 responden perawat. Data dikumpulkan pada tahun 2013 menggunakan 2 kuesioner. Kuesioner pertama digunakan untuk mengetahui diagnosis keperawatan dan kolaboratif yang paling sering ditegakkan oleh perawat. Kuesioner kedua digunakan untuk mengidenti kasi data yang paling sering ditemukan oleh perawat. Kuesioner kedua dikembangkan berdasarkan Intan’s Screening Diagnosis Assessment (ISDA).
Hasil: Dari hasil penelitian didapati terdapat 46 label diagnosis keperawatan dibuat oleh perawat. Dari 46 label diagnosis keperawatan hanya 14 label diagnosis (28,26%) yang sesuai dengan label diagnosis berdasarkan taxonomi North American Nursing Diagnoses Association (NANDA) (2012-2014). Sebanyak 11 diagnosis (23,91%) dapat tercakup sebagai konsep penting (atau fokus diagnostik) dalam taksonomi NANDA. Namun label diagnosis keperawatan tersebut tidak dituliskan secara benar sesuai label NANDA. Selain itu ada juga 22 label diagnosis yang dituliskan tidak sesuai taksonomi NANDA.
Kesimpulan: Mayoritas label diagnosis keperawatan yang dituliskan perawat tidak sesuai dengan label diagnosis keperawatan dalam taksonomi NANDA.


Keywords


diagnosis keperawatan; kemungkinan diagnosis; gangguan jiwa

Full Text:

PDF


References

Sangat    Besar,    Beban    akibat Gangguan   Jiwa.      2001   [cited   2007   25 July];     Available      from: http://www.gizi.net/cgi-bin/berita/fullnews.cgi?newsid1002779805,55571.

Nurjannah I,  Warsini  S,  Mills    Comparing methods  of  diagnostic  reasoning  in  nursing. Journal  of  Nursing  and  Health  Care.  2013; 1(1).

Departement     Daftar    Rumah Sakit  Indonesia.    2007  [cited  2007  27  July]; Available from: http://www.yanmedik-depkes.net/statistik_rs_2007/daftar_rs/menuRS.html.

Wilujani A. Pemahaman Baru, Harapan Baru. 2001 [cited  2007  27  July];  Available  from: http://www.tempointeraktif.com/hg/nusa/jawamadura/2005/02/21/brk,20050221-55,id.html.

Carpenito L,   J,      Nursing   Diagnoses Application  to  Clinical  Practice.  13,  editor. Lippincot  Williams  &  Wilkins; Philadelphia: 2010.

Nurjannah   Proses  Keperawatan  NANDA, NOC    dan    NIC    (Indonesian    language). Mocomedia; Yogyakarta: 2010.

Fitria   Rekomendasi  Konas  Keperawatan Jiwa VII di Bali.  2010 [cited 2012 3 January]; Available      from: http://www.fkep.unpad.ac.id/2010/12/rekomendasi-konas-jiwa-bali-4/

Herdman T,    H,    Kamitsuru        NANDA International  Nursing  Diagnoses:  Definition & Classification, 2015-2017. Wiley Blackwell; Oxford: 2014.

Wilkinson J, M. Nursing Process and Critical Thinking. 4rd, editor. Pearson Education; New Jersey: 2007.

Nurjannah I. ISDA Intan’s Screening Diagnoses Assessment. Mocomedia; Yogyakarta: 2010.

McCloskey J, C, Bulechek G, M. Standardizing the language   for   nursing   treatments:   an overview   of   the      Nursing   Outlook. 1994;42(2):56-63.

Clark D,    A  language  for  nursing.  Nursing Standard. 1999;13(31):42.

Bulechek G, M, Butcher H, K, Dochterman J, M. Nursing Intervention Classification. fifth, editor. St Louis, Missouri: Mosby Elsevier; 2008.

Herdman T,      Diagnosis   keperawatan: definisi  dan  klasifikasi  2012-2014.  EGC; Jakarta: 2011.

Paans W, Sermeus W, Neweg R, MB, Krijnen W, P,  Cees  P    Do  knowledge,  knowledge sources   and   reasoning   skills   affect   the accuracy of nursing diagnoses? a randomised study. BMC Nursing. 2012;11(1):11-22.

Wong K,  S,  T,  Chung  W,  Y,    Diagnostic reasoning  process  using  patient  simulation in different learning environments. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2002;11:65-72.

Yang H, Thompson C, Bland M. The effect of clinical experience,  judgment  task  difficulty and  time  pressure  on  nurses’  confidence calibration in a high fidelity clinical stimulation. BMC    Medical    Informatics    and    Decision Making. 2012;12:113.

Nurjannah I,  Warsini  S,  Mills    Comparing methods  of  diagnostic  reasoning  in  nursing.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jkkk.29011

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 5035 | views : 8755

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Intansari Nurjannah, Dewi Retno Pamungkas, Sri Warsini



Jurnal Keperawatan Klinis dan Komunitas (Clinical and Community Nursing Journal) 
collaborates with DPW PPNI DIY

Lisensi Creative Commons  

Jurnal Keperawatan Klinis dan Komunitas (Clinical and Community Nursing Journal) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.