is risk for postpartum hemorrhage a safety or physiological need?

[GingerSue]

I'm trying to write up a care plan for postpartum period

and I want to include risk for postpartum hemorrhage if the uterus contraction is disrupted

is this risk considered a safety need or a physiological need? {Maslow}

(safety includes safety from physiological threats, protection, lack of danger, etc)

thanks

[allthingsbright]

Think ABC's--it is obviously physiological 1st and then on Maslow's it is safety 2nd--so both, IMHO.

[meandragonbrett]

"Risk for post partal hemorrhage" would not be an approved NANDA dx. Is this patient actively experiencing PPH? Some dx for an actual PPH could include Acute Pain, Decreaced cardiac output, Fear, Disturbed body image,

[GingerSue]

no, it's not a real patient, so there's no PPH

that's the reason that I am planning to include it as a "risk for"

and I thought of the ABCs - but, since it is risk, then it isn't priority,

I am structuring priorities according to Maslow - so because it is a possible danger - that's why I am wondering if it is more of a safety need

[GingerSue]

would it be better to say

Risk for Fluid Volume Deficit related to excessive loss

[Daytonite, BSN, RN]

If you're going to go by NANDA rules, you want to word this diagnosis as Risk for Deficient Fluid volume R/T acute blood loss. That makes it a physiological need.

If you are doing your own wording rules in setting up nursing diagnoses, as this is encouraged by some educators, you can certainly say Risk for Postpartum Hemorrhage R/T acute blood loss. It will still be a physiological need.

The body needs blood to bring the cells nutrients, water and oxygen. That is what makes it a physiologic need. This would place it in the category of the need for either oxygen or food and nutrients.

When you are determining the classification of "Risk for" diagnoses, the easiest way to do that is to put all your "Risk for" diagnoses into a group and then merely ignore the "Risk for" part of the statements acting as if they aren't even there and then sequence the diagnoses in that little group of "Risk for" diagnoses as their own little subgrouping.

This must be some big care plan you are working on. You've been working on this thing for at least a week!

[GingerSue]

I tend to do a lot of research when I do assignments (or take any course)

thanks for your explanation about the need for blood to bring nutrients, etc, because this is how I was thinking, and would be my reason for putting this into the physiologic need category

[kukukajoo, LPN]

Hey thanks everyone- this will help greatly in my careplan I need to write tomorrow! Maybe I will start now and forget the rug shampooing!

[GingerSue]

what about the "risk for infection r/t open umbilical stump - will this be a safety need? {because there is physiological threat}

in the same way that rubella vaccine is given to prevent infection, as a protection {so I'm going to include it in the safety need section}

and because both of these are concerns about infection - this is why I'm putting both of them in the safety need

[Daytonite, BSN, RN]

what about the "risk for infection r/t open umbilical stump - will this be a safety need? {because there is physiological threat}

in the same way that rubella vaccine is given to prevent infection, as a protection {so I'm going to include it in the safety need section}

and because both of these are concerns about infection - this is why I'm putting both of them in the safety need

Yes, that sounds right to me.