Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ORIGINAL ARTICLE • Rev. Bras. Enferm. 77 (2) • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167-2023-0202 copiar

Tecnologia para la asistencia de enfermería en una Unidad de Terapia Intensiva Materna: estudio metodológico

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

RESUMEN

Objetivos:

desarrollar y validar un plan de cuidados de enfermería en una Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos Materno.

Métodos:

estudio metodológico, desarrollado en etapas: revisión integrativa; construcción de la Historia de la Enfermería; reestructuración del plan de atención; validación de apariencia y contenido por parte de los jueces.

Resultados:

la historia se organizó en secciones: Identificación; Necesidades Humanas Básicas; Examen físico; y Evaluación de las Necesidades Humanas Básicas. Se reestructuró el plan de atención con 34 diagnósticos, organizados según las necesidades humanas básicas. Se obtuvo un nivel satisfactorio de validación de apariencia de la historia y plan de cuidados (Índice de Acuerdo que varía entre 86,3 y 100 para ambos instrumentos), y de contenido con índices promedio de 90,8 y 92,8, respectivamente. Se consolidaron 34 diagnósticos, sus intervenciones y acciones de enfermería.

Conclusiones:

los instrumentos fueron considerados relevantes y pertinentes en cuanto a apariencia y contenido, pudiéndose recomendar su uso en la institución en estudio, así como en otros servicios similares.

Descriptores:
Enfermería; Proceso de Enfermería; Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos; Investigación Metodológica em Enfermería; Salud Materna

Variables	Totally agree		Partially agree		Indifferent		Partially disagree		Totally disagree		CI
Variables	n	%	n	%	N	%	n	%	n	%	CI
NH
Is the instrument relevant?	20	90.9	2	9.1	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	100
Is the information presented clearly and objectively?	14	63.6	5	22.7	0	0.0	3	13.6	0	0.0	86.3
Is the information scientifically correct?	18	81.8	3	13.6	0	0.0	1	4.5	0	0.0	95.4
Are the font and size appropriate?	16	72.7	6	27.3	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	100
Are the spacing between letters adequate?	16	72.7	4	18.2	2	9.1	0	0.0	0	0.0	90.9
Does the instrument have a logical sequence?	16	72.7	3	13.6	0	0.0	2	9.1	1	4.5	86.3
Is the instrument easy to read and understand?	14	63.6	6	27.3	0	0.0	2	9.1	0	0.0	90.9
Total Cronbach’s alpha = 0.780	114	74.0	29	18.8	2	1.3	8	5.2	1	0.6	92.8
Nursing care plan
Is the technology relevant?	18	81.8	4	18.2	0	0.0	0	0.0	0	0.0	100
Is the information presented clearly and objectively?	12	54.5	7	31.8	0	0.0	3	13.6	0	0.0	86.3
Is the information scientifically correct?	17	77.3	3	13.6	0	0.0	2	9.1	0	0.0	90.9
Are the font and size appropriate?	17	77.3	3	13.6	1	4.5	1	4.5	0	0.0	90.9
Are the spacing between letters adequate?	16	72.7	3	13.6	3	13.6	0	0.0	0	0.0	86.3
Does the technology present a logical sequence?	16	72.7	5	22.7	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	4.5	95.4
Is the technology easy to read and understand?	13	59.1	7	31.8	1	4.5	1	4.5	0	0.0	90.9
Total Cronbach’s alpha = 0.747;	109	70.8	32	20.8	5	3.2	7	4.5	1	0.6	91.3

Variables	Totally agree		Partially agree		Indifferent		Partially disagree		Totally disagree		CI
Variables	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	CI
Content validity of general aspects of the NH instrument
Level of agreement: Identification	16	72.7	4	18.2	0	0.0	1	4.5	1	4.5	90.9
Level of agreement: Psychobiological Needs	11	50.0	7	31.8	1	4.5	2	9.1	1	4.5	81.8
Level of agreement: Psychosocial Needs	15	68.2	4	18.2	1	4.5	1	4.5	1	4.5	86.3
Level of agreement: Psychospiritual Needs	15	68.2	6	27.3	0	0.0	1	4.5	0	0.0	95.4
Level of agreement: Physical Examination	12	54.5	7	31.8	1	4.5	1	4.5	1	4.5	86.3
Level of agreement: Assessment of basic human needs	15	68.2	6	27.3	1	4.5	0	0.0	0	0.0	95.4
Total Cronbach’s alpha = 0.824	84	63.6	34	25.8	4	3.0	6	4.5	4	3.0	89.3
General content validity of the NH instrument technology
Does the instrument meet the first stage of NP?	14	63.6	6	27.3	1	4.5	1	4.5	0	0.0	90.9
Is the instrument relevant to nurses’ clinical practice?	17	77.3	4	18.2	0	0.0	1	4.5	0	0.0	95.4
Does the instrument address psychobiological, psychosocial and psychospiritual needs?	15	68.2	5	22.7	0	0.0	2	9.1	0	0.0	90.9
Total: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.839	46	69.7	15	22.7	1	1.5	4	6.1	0	0.0	92.4

Variables	Totally agree		Partially agree		Indifferent		Partially disagree		Totally disagree		CI
Variables	n		n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	CI
Content validity regarding the NP, relevance and basic human needs
Does the instrument meet the steps of NP?	16	72.7	4	18.2	0	0.0	1	4.5	1	4.5	90.9
Is the instrument relevant to nurses’ clinical practice?	16	72.7	5	22.7	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	4.5	95.5
Does the instrument address psychobiological, psychosocial and psychospiritual needs?	17	77.3	4	18.2	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	4.5	95.5
Total Cronbach’s alpha = 0.958	49	74.2	13	19.7	0	0.0	1	1.5	3	4.5	94.0
Summary of content validity by necessity, according to the three dimensions of basic human needs in Horta(⁶6 Santos LSC, Oliveira BKF, Watanabe M, Silva EO, Vattimo MFF. Wanda de Aguiar Horta: historical review and scientific influence in the period of Consolidation of Nursing as a Science in Brazil, 1960 to 1999. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11(12):e65111234095. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i12.34095 https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i12.3409... )
Psychobiological Needs¹1 Silva DCE, Lopes LGF, Nunes MGS, Souza MAF, Moura RN, Medeiros HHA. Profile of obstetric patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a public hospital. Rev Baiana Enferm. 2020;34:e35874. https://doi.org/10.18471/rbe.v34.35874 https://doi.org/10.18471/rbe.v34.35874...	2146	72.8	560	19.0	3	0.1	47	1.6	192	6.5	91.8
Psychosocial Needs²2 Luebcke C, Smith BE, Abrahamson K. An integrated review of obstetric admissions in the Intensive Care Unit. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2022;41(3):132-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.0000000000000521 https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.000000000000...	251	76.1	51	15.5	0	0.0	6	1.8	22	6.7	91.5
Psychospiritual Needs³3 Vettorazzi J, Valério EG, Zanatta MA, Scheffler MH, Costa SHAM, Ramos JGL. Temporal evolution of maternal mortality: 1980-2019. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2021;43(09)):662-8. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1735300 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1735300...	164	74.5	38	17.3	0	0.0	4	1.8	14	6.4	91.8
Total Cronbach’s alpha1 = 0.999; Cronbach’s alpha2 = 0.994; Cronbach’s alpha3 = 0.989	2561	74.5	649	17.3	3	0.03	57	1.7	228	6.5	91.7

Associação Brasileira de Enfermagem SGA Norte Quadra 603 Conj. "B" - Av. L2 Norte 70830-102 Brasília, DF, Brasil, Tel.: (55 61) 3226-0653, Fax: (55 61) 3225-4473 - Brasília - DF - Brazil
E-mail: reben@abennacional.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS