0Feb 1, '12 by Hesketh86Is this an acceptable nursing diagnosis, this is the first time writing one for this particular complication.
Delayed surgical recovery r/t total knee replacement AEB inadvertant removal of incision staple and sanguinous drainage.
Thanks any help would be appreciated!Last edit by Hesketh86 on Feb 1, '12
1Feb 1, '12 by GrnTea, BSN, MSN, RNin the nanda classification, there are a number of defining characteristics of a nursing diagnosis of delayed surgical recovery.
your delayed recovery isn't because he had a knee replacement, is it? is it because there is "evidence of interrupted healing" with the wound open because of premature staple removal?
so, what you meant to say was, "delayed surgical recovery r/t interrupted healing of the surgical area, a/e/b early staple removal and wound dehiscence (or whatever)"
0Feb 1, '12 by Hesketh86Thank you, the pt had a TKR last week. During her physical therapy, a staple popped out and the incision started to bleed.
I have the "COX's Clinical Application of Nursing Diagnosis" book. The interrupted healing of surgical area is listed under the defining characterstics section of the book. We were told in class that the defining characteristics portion of each diagnosis is where we obtain our AEB. The related factors portion is where we are to obtain our r/t information but the only thing it says is "Tob be developed", which I am not sure what is meant by that!?
What about this one:
Delayed surgical recovery r/t incision from Total knee replacement AEB premature removal of staple and sanguineous drainage.
GrnTea: thank you again for the Nursing diagnosis, I am just confused with this diagnosis.
1Feb 2, '12 by GrnTea, BSN, MSN, RNgot it exactly backward. the "related to" means "caused by." so the delay is not caused by the incision, is it? the delay is caused by the premature removal of the staple. the bleeding doesn't cause the delay either, and unless it's an abnormal amount that's making things worse, or showing that worse things are going on in the knee, it's not evidence of anything. does that make sense?