Nurse Practitioner’s use of Standardized Nursing Language A L ITERATURE REVIEW Larissa Furger, BSN Student; Shelley-Rae Pehler, PhD, RN | Department of Nursing and Health Sciences

BACKGROUND INTERVENTION RESULTS LIMITATIONS Since advance practice nurse practitioners (APRNs) primarily document • Only found articles—no web resources used using medical language (ICD-10), the nursing care APRNs provide is • Limited to populations/settings as identified. Missing populations such currently invisible and the impact on patient outcomes cannot be as APRNs that work in acute care and populations (I.e. pediatrics and measured. OB) • Linked Omaha to NIC taxonomy—error possibly introduced • Only reviewed articles with American Nurses Associated approved PURPOSE standardized nursing language A literature review was aimed to examine how APRNs are currently using standardized nursing language (SNL) to document their advanced practice nursing interventions in a primary care setting. CONCLUSIONS • NIC is able to capture advanced nursing practice • Largest number of interventions fell under the following METHODS Domains: - Behavioral • CINAHL and MEDLINE databases were searched - Physiological: Basic • Search terms: nurse practitioner, documentation, barriers, electronic - Physiological: Complex medical record, nursing standardized language, interventions, NIC, Omaha and standardized language as search terms CATEGORIES OF ARTICLES • Largest number of interventions fell under the following • No limits of years were imposed during the search Classes: Category # of Articles • Inclusion criteria specific to APRN practice and standardized nursing - Coping Assistance languages Barriers to the uses of standardized 3 - Patient Education • Two reviewers reviewed each article to examine the advanced nurse nursing language - Risk Management practitioners use of standardized nursing language Actual nursing interventions listed 15 • NIC taxonomy was used to organize nursing interventions found • Standardized nursing language has the capability to capture the Single case studies using standardized 3 impact of patient outcomes by APRNs nursing language • NANDA-I, NIC, and NOC were the most widely used RESULTS Non ANA approved standardized 1 standardized nursing language by APRNs in the literature nursing language reviewed Of the 55 articles reviewed Database Description/Development 2 • 25 met inclusion criteria • 17 had no standardized nursing language or APRN practice identified • 14 had standardized nursing language but no APRNs STANDARDIZED NURSING LANGUAGE IDENTIFIED Standardized nursing language # of Articles POPULATION and/or SETTINGS NANDA-I, NIC, NOC 14 Omaha 5 • Case Study - Pulmonary patient No standardized nursing language 3 Identified - Sexually transmitted disease woman URSING ISCUSSION MPLICATIONS - HIV positive male Non-ANA Approved standardized 1 N D /I • Primary Care Faculty Practice Clinic nursing language • Elderly patients across multiple settings • Barriers still exist for APRNs to use standardized nursing • Adults with developmental disabilities BARRIERS TO USING STANDARDIZED NURSING LANGUAGES language to document their advanced nursing practice care • APRNs in Minnesota they provide • Adult care in Michigan • Standardized nursing language not important • Must link NIC to reimbursement • APRN students • Future research to capture populations not included in this • • Catalonia, Barcelona Lack of reimbursement literature synthesis • Urban community nursing center • Lack of time • Future research is needed to test the effectiveness of nursing • Family APRNs in rural communities interventions used by APRN • Lack of standardized nursing language in Electronic Health Records (EHR)

We thank the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs for supporting this research, and Learning & Technology Services for printing this poster.