22 (1), 702002: 59 59- The Problem of Nursing Common Language for the Information Sharing in Clinical Practice The fact-finding in regard to the correspondence between name and content of nursing action 3 4 Satoko TSURU Mutsuko NAKANISHIKatsumasa OTA Sachiyo MURASHIMA 2 2 2 Kaoru NAKANE Manami KAWAGUCHI Kyoko KATAYAMA Yumiko DEWAZAWA 86% 77% 81% 80% 41% (, ) 1 1 Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of 734-8551 1-2-3 Medicine, Hiroshima University 2 1-2-3 KASUMI, MINAMI-KU, 3 HIROSHIMA 734-8551 JAPAN 4 2 Kobe City College of Nursing 3 Nagano College of Nursing 4 Department of Community Health Nursing, E-mail address: stsuru@hiroshima-u.ac.jp Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo
60 The rapid development of the recent information technology promotes actuality possibility of information sharing between medical workers with electric patient record system, and the standardization of the nursing terminology becomes a problem of the urgency. However, what does not exist still is true for terminology system recognized as the common language, which describes the nursing practice. Since it is different by medical system and culture of this country for needs for the nursing, the international standardization work is not easy. And, it is similar in this country. In this study, action name and action content were investigated for the purpose of the standardization of nursing action name used in nursing practice of our country, and both correspondence situations were analyzed. To begin with, the research method was developed, and the data was collected using the technique, and the analysis was carried out. As the result, rate of correspondence between action name and action content was quantitatively shown ( adult nursing 86%,pediatric nursing 77%, psychiatric nursing 81%, home health nursing 80%, maternity nursing 41% ). (Keywords: nursing, language, action, standardization, information sharing) 10)11) HL7 HL7 ISO TC 251 1)2)3) NIC(Nursing Intervention Classification) 4) NOC(Nursing Outcome Classification) 5) ICNP(International Classification for Nursing Practice ) 6)7)8)9)
22 (1), 2002 61 -
62 (a) (b) (c) 34 183 15 25 15 30
22 (1), 2002 63 1)
64 2)
22 (1), 2002 65
66
22 (1), 2002 67
68 A A1 A1-1 A1-2 A2 A2-1 A2-2 A2-3 A3 A4 B B1 B2 B2-1 B2-2 B2-3 B2-4 B2-5
22 (1), 2002 69 a) b) c) 13)
70 10. BP (1998) 11. IT 2001 12. 8910 32511-191999 13. 9-10 (1999) 1. Gordon M. / 1998 1997-1998. 2. North American Nursing Diagnosis Association(1999) : Introduction to the Proposed NANDA Taxonomy : A Multiracial Health Patterns Framework. In NURSING DIAGNOSIS: Definition & Classification, 1999-2000. pp.158-164. The Association. 3. J. (1995) 4. Joanne C. McCloskey, Gloria M. Bulechek: Nursing Interventions Classification Mosby, Philadelphia, 1st Edition.(1992),2nd Edition.(1996),3rd Edition.(2000) 5. Marion Johnson & Meridean Mass (1997): Nursing Outcomes Classification 6. Clark,J.&Lang,N.Nursing's next advancean internal classification for nursing practice, International Nursing Review,394109-112,1996 7. ICN ICNP 20312-2101997 8. G.H. R.A. ICNP 203212-2221997 9. International council of Nursing : ICNP( version)(1999)