English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 45422/58598 (78%)
造訪人次 : 2525843      線上人數 : 224
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://libir.tmu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/5396


    題名: 比較護理診斷為主的問題導向記錄法與焦點護理紀錄法之成效差異
    Comparison of Outcome Between Nursing Diagnosis of Problem Oriented Recording Method and Focus Charting Method.
    作者: 黃芳子
    Huang,Fan-Tz
    貢獻者: 護理學研究所
    關鍵詞: 護理診斷
    焦點護理記錄法
    Nursing diagnosis
    Focus charting
    日期: 2003
    上傳時間: 2009-09-11 15:31:40 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本研究屬於一描述性病歷回顧研究。主要目的在探討及比較護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法(S.O.A.P.I.E.)與焦點護理記錄法(D.A.R.T.)之成效差異。本研究採橫斷面調查(cross-sectional)，樣本取於民國八十七年台北地區，醫院評鑑為區域醫院的一所醫院之護理人員，此所醫院分別於過去推行過護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法或焦點護理記錄法，而現在以其中一種為護理記錄法者。資料的收集工具為參考文獻自擬護理記錄完整性評量表及護理人員對護理記錄滿意度量表，分別針對符合入選條件之出院完成病歷以回溯病歷方式及護理人員問卷填寫方式完成資料的收集。本研究正式資料收集日期於91年3月至91年4月下旬完成，共發出40份問卷，回收40份，回收率100﹪，其中有效問卷為40份，回收問卷有效率100﹪；病歷回溯分為護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法及焦點護理記錄法病歷，每位受測護理人員5本，共各為200本。資料以平均數、百分比、標準差、單因子變異分析等統計方法進行處理和分析。
    研究結果發現：1. 以護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法臨床記錄的完整性平均得分為3.26分(滿分為6分)，焦點護理記錄法臨床記錄的完整性平均得分為3.31分(滿分為6分) 2.以護理診斷為主的問題導向記錄法臨床運用滿意度，平均得分為2.71分(屬滿意)，焦點護理記錄法臨床運用滿意度，平均得分為2.91分(屬滿意) 3.二者記錄法於臨床運用滿意度成效成效有顯著差異(p=0.011)；但在護理記錄完整性上，二者記錄法無顯著差異(p>0.05) 4.每日上班於臨床護理工作中在護理記錄所耗費時間上，以護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法，平均為88.5分，焦點護理記錄法護理記錄法，平均為73分；在自行選擇以何者方法作為臨床護理記錄法時，有80﹪護理人員選擇以焦點護理記錄法，只有20﹪護理人員選擇以護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法 4.基本屬性項目對護理診斷為主的問題導向護理記錄法與焦點護理記錄法於臨床運用成效並無影響；但基本屬性中以病房工作年資、職稱、年齡對護理紀錄法滿意度細項內容有影響，但醫院服務年資、學歷、科別對護理紀錄法滿意度細項內容無影響，而醫院服務年資、病房工作年資、科別對護理紀錄法書寫之完整性細項內容有影響，但年齡、職稱、學歷對護理紀錄書寫之完整性細項內容無影響。
    最後，本研究結果將有助於臨床護理主管選擇護理記錄法之參考，並可做為簡化護理記錄工作之參據。
    This study was a descriptive. The primary objective was to analyze and to compare the differences in outcomes between nursing diagnosis of problem oriented recording method (SOAPIE) and focus charting method (DART). The design was cross-sectional. Samples were nurses and from a district hospital in Taipei area. Nurses who work in this hospital had experiences in using both SOAPIE and DART recoding methods before. Instruments for data collection included a self-developed nursing record assessment tool and satisfaction questionnaire. The data collection period was from March to April of 2002. The response rate was 100%. Five charts were selected for each nurse and total 200 charts were reviewed for either SOAPIE or DART recording methods. Data were then analyzed by mean, percentage, standard deviation, and one-way ANOVA.
    The results were as follows.
    1. The level of completeness for SOAPIE was 3.26 (total score was 6), but DART was 3.31.
    2. The average satisfaction score was 2.71 (means satisfaction) for SOAPIE, but 2.91(means satisfaction) for DART.
    3. A significant difference was found in satisfaction scores between SOAPIE and DART (p =0.011). But, no significant difference was found for the level of completeness between these two recoding methods (p >0.05).
    4. The average nurse's time spending on nursing record was 88.5 minutes for SOAPIE and 73 minutes for DART every day. For asking about what method would choice in the future, about 80% of nurses selected , DART only 20% selected SOAPIE.
    5. Satisfaction was affected by years of unit working experience, credential, and age, but other demographics did not. The level of completeness were affected by hospital working experience, unit working experience, and credentials.
    To sum up, the findings of this study can be used to assist clinical nursing managers to select nursing recording methods and to simplify the contents of nursing recording methods.
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[學士後護理學系] 博碩士論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    摘要.doc29KbMicrosoft Word107檢視/開啟
    摘要.pdf761KbAdobe PDF1402檢視/開啟
    摘要.ppt168KbMicrosoft Powerpoint236檢視/開啟
    摘要.ps542KbPostscript93檢視/開啟


    在TMUIR中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

    TAIR相關文章

    著作權聲明 Copyright Notice

    • 本平台之數位內容為臺北醫學大學所收錄之機構典藏，包含體系內各式學術著作及學術產出。秉持開放取用的精神，提供使用者進行資料檢索、下載與取用，惟仍請適度、合理地於合法範圍內使用本平台之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，請先取得著作權人之授權。

      The digital content on this platform is part of the Taipei Medical University Institutional Repository, featuring various academic works and outputs from the institution. It offers free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please use the content appropriately and within legal boundaries to respect copyright owners' rights. For commercial use, please obtain prior authorization from the copyright owner.

    • 瀏覽或使用本平台，視同使用者已完全接受並瞭解聲明中所有規範、中華民國相關法規、一切國際網路規定及使用慣例，並不得為任何不法目的使用TMUIR。

      By utilising the platform, users are deemed to have fully accepted and understood all the regulations set out in the statement, relevant laws of the Republic of China, all international internet regulations, and usage conventions. Furthermore, users must not use TMUIR for any illegal purposes.

    • 本平台盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益。若發現本平台之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，煩請權利人通知本平台維護人員([email protected])，將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。

      TMUIR is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff([email protected]). We will remove the work from the repository.

    Back to Top
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋