AIM: This paper presents a discussion of the conceptual and practical relationships between the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and the NANDA-International Taxonomy II for nursing diagnoses, and their use in nursing practice. BACKGROUND: The ICF provides a common classification framework for all healthcare professionals, including nurses. Nursing care plans can be broadly based on NANDA-I taxonomies. No published attempt has been made to systematically compare the NANDA-I Taxonomy II to the ICF. DATA SOURCES: The most recently published descriptions of both classifications and a case example presenting the combined use of both classifications. The work was carried out in 2009. DISCUSSION: There are conceptual commonalities and differences between the ICF and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II. In the case example, the overlap between the ICF categories and NANDA-I nursing diagnoses reflects the fact that the ICF, focusing on functioning and disability, and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II, with its functioning health patterns, are similar in their approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The NANDA-I Taxonomy II permits the fulfilment of requirements that are exclusively nursing issues. The application of the ICF is useful for nurses to communicate nursing issues with other healthcare professionals in a common language. For nurses, knowledge shared with other healthcare professionals may contribute to broader understanding of a patient's situation. CONCLUSION: The ICF and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II should be used in concert by nurses and can complement each other to enhance the quality of clinical team work and nursing practice.
AIM: This paper presents a discussion of the conceptual and practical relationships between the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and the NANDA-International Taxonomy II for nursing diagnoses, and their use in nursing practice. BACKGROUND: The ICF provides a common classification framework for all healthcare professionals, including nurses. Nursing care plans can be broadly based on NANDA-I taxonomies. No published attempt has been made to systematically compare the NANDA-I Taxonomy II to the ICF. DATA SOURCES: The most recently published descriptions of both classifications and a case example presenting the combined use of both classifications. The work was carried out in 2009. DISCUSSION: There are conceptual commonalities and differences between the ICF and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II. In the case example, the overlap between the ICF categories and NANDA-I nursing diagnoses reflects the fact that the ICF, focusing on functioning and disability, and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II, with its functioning health patterns, are similar in their approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The NANDA-I Taxonomy II permits the fulfilment of requirements that are exclusively nursing issues. The application of the ICF is useful for nurses to communicate nursing issues with other healthcare professionals in a common language. For nurses, knowledge shared with other healthcare professionals may contribute to broader understanding of a patient's situation. CONCLUSION: The ICF and the NANDA-I Taxonomy II should be used in concert by nurses and can complement each other to enhance the quality of clinical team work and nursing practice.