PURPOSE: To illustrate the utility of a standardized nursing terminology to calculate the dosage of the Client Adherence Profiling-Intervention Tailoring (CAP-IT) and to determine the extent to which a tailored intervention was delivered to 117 persons with HIV/AIDS who participated in the experimental arm of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: The intervention nurse assigned nursing diagnoses from the Home Health Care Classification (HHCC) based upon CAP scores. During the IT phase of CAP-IT, the nurse delivered and documented a tailored set of nursing interventions associated with the CAP and assigned nursing diagnoses. Hierarchical linear regression was used to evaluate the extent to which the number of interventions and intervention times were tailored to client needs. RESULTS: Linear regression models that included CAP scores and nursing diagnoses as predictor variables explained 53.2% of the variance in total number of interventions and 58.9% of the variance in intervention time. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the standardized nursing terminology enabled calculation of the intervention dose and documentation that a tailored intervention was delivered.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To illustrate the utility of a standardized nursing terminology to calculate the dosage of the Client Adherence Profiling-Intervention Tailoring (CAP-IT) and to determine the extent to which a tailored intervention was delivered to 117 persons with HIV/AIDS who participated in the experimental arm of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: The intervention nurse assigned nursing diagnoses from the Home Health Care Classification (HHCC) based upon CAP scores. During the IT phase of CAP-IT, the nurse delivered and documented a tailored set of nursing interventions associated with the CAP and assigned nursing diagnoses. Hierarchical linear regression was used to evaluate the extent to which the number of interventions and intervention times were tailored to client needs. RESULTS: Linear regression models that included CAP scores and nursing diagnoses as predictor variables explained 53.2% of the variance in total number of interventions and 58.9% of the variance in intervention time. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the standardized nursing terminology enabled calculation of the intervention dose and documentation that a tailored intervention was delivered.
Authors: Cornelia Beck; Jean C McSweeney; Kathy C Richards; Paula K Roberson; Pao-Feng Tsai; Elaine Souder Journal: Nurs Outlook Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Vicki S Conn; Todd M Ruppar; Keith C Chan; Jacqueline Dunbar-Jacob; Ginette A Pepper; Sabina De Geest Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Wei-Ti Chen; Dean Wantland; Paula Reid; Inge B Corless; Lucille S Eller; Scholastika Iipinge; William L Holzemer; Kathleen Nokes; Elizbeth Sefcik; Marta Rivero-Mendez; Joachim Voss; Patrice Nicholas; J Craig Phillips; John M Brion; Caro Dawson Rose; Carmen J Portillo; Kenn Kirksey; Kathleen M Sullivan; Mallory O Johnson; Lynda Tyer-Viola; Allison R Webel Journal: J AIDS Clin Res Date: 2013-11-01