2. Objectives
Participants will….
learn benefits of documentation of FCN services.
identify and implement a documentation system for their
program.
understand barriers to documentation of services.
incorporate risk assessment tools and family history in
the care of their clients.
3. FCN – The problem
FCNs often work unpaid
lack of consistency in documentation tools
Contributing factor: shortage of time and multiple roles of
the FCN
4. FCN – The problem
The following survey question sent out to FCNs in the Twin
Cities:
Do you utilize a client / family info documentation tool
provided by the Faith Community Nurse Network?
Low response rate (only 5 nurses replied)
4 out 5 did not document their services
Rydholm (2006) noted that volunteer nurses were less
intentional in their documentation.
5. FCN – Research question
In faith community nurses, how does documentation of services provided
compared to no documentation impact outcomes of their programs?
6. The literature: Key points
The scope and standards of the FCN states:
Documentation & confidential and secure storage of
relevant data is part of the FCN work (American Nurses
Association & Health Ministries Association, 2012)
7. The Literature: Key points
Essential responsibilities of the FCN include documenting
provided care, outcomes of that care, and services
provided (Miller & Carson 2010)
Clear and concise documentation facilitates the work of
the FCN
8. The literature: Key points
Rydholm, et al. (2008) reviewed seventy five FCN chartings
from the greater Twin Cities.
Cost savings analyzed from the study:
The FCNs saved the system over 3 million in averted stays in
acute or critical care (Rydholm, et al., 2008).
FCNs showed a health care cost savings of $1,910,630 from 2005
- 2012 (Yeaworth & Sailors, 2014).
Late access to care can be more costly to government and third
party payers.
9. The Literature: Key points
Remarkable success of parish nurses in bridging care
between the informal, faith-based system and the formal
acute health care system.
Other authors suggest an internet based documentation
and tracking systems to demonstrate benefits to
communities on cost savings based on services provided
(Brown, 2006)
10. The literature: Key points
Dyess, Chase and Newlin (2010) evaluated seven research
studies in the area of documentation and evaluation of
faith community nurses practice.
Dyess, et al. discussed the essence of the FCN practice
should be captured by documentation of services and the
financial impact of their practice should be accounted for.
11. The literature shows…
Documentation is quite limited in charting holistic aspect
of nursing care
Documentation is limited in charting specific patient
outcomes at individual and population level
Documentation is necessary to demonstrate effectiveness
of practice
(Dyess, et al., 2010)
12. Documentation tools
Parish nurses can choose a suitable documentation tools available free of
charge or for a fee
Samples of free documentation tools (Please click on the hyperlinks to learn
more about these tools)
Faith Community Nurse Network of the Greater Twin Cities
http://www.fcnntc.org/documentation-tools.html
By Lisa Burkhart, PhD, RN, MPH (need to send a request to the author before
using the forms)
http://www.luc.edu/nursing/about/faculty/lisaburkhartphdrnmph.shtml
13. Documentation tools
Sample paid Services:
Henry Ford Macomb Hospitals (subscribe to a network $3000, for independent
FCNs $99 / yr).
http://www.luc.edu/nursing/about/faculty/lisaburkhartphdrnmph.shtml
Subscription details:
https://www.fcndocumentation.com/MenuOption/Details.aspx?ID=5
Documentation module incorporates: the North American Nursing Diagnoses
Association (NANDA), Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC) and Nursing
Outcomes Classification (NOC)
(Writer does not endorse any paid documentation tools provided here. They
are just sample available in the internet).
14. Documentation tools
More paid services:
Pittsburgh Mercy Parish Nurse & Heath Ministry ($400 for health systems, $200
for each FCN or each church).
http://www.pmhs.org/parish-nurse-program/education-and-resources.aspx
https://www.pmhs.org/parish-nurse-program/parish-nurse-store.aspx
(Writer does not endorse any paid documentation tools provided here. They
are just samples available in the internet).
15. Assessment tools
Free online assessment tools on major causes of death in the U.S.
Heart Disease: Heart attack risk calculator available from the AHA and
American Stroke Association
https://www.heart.org/gglRisk/main_en_US.html
The United State Surgeon’s general family portrait to Learn about your risk
for conditions that can run in families, such as cancer.
https://familyhistory.hhs.gov/FHH/html/index.html
The tool can also be used to document family tree and visualize available
family support and relationships.
(These are valuable assessment tools available for public health nurses).
16. Recommendations
Parish nurses are providing a wealth of interventions to
diverse populations but are not documenting in a way that
allows for critical appraisal (Dandridge, 2014)
Parish nurses must adopt a unified language and document
clear goals and measurable outcomes (Dandridge, 2014).
Utilizing a documentation tool which is convenient to your
community need is essential
17. Gap in research
Limitations:
There is a gap in research comparing the benefits of documentation of
nursing services to lack of documentation to specific outcomes achieved.
18. Conclusion
Documentation should be essential part of the FCN practice to demonstrate
effectiveness of practice and outcomes of provided services
There are different formats of documentation.
There is lack of accountability in unpaid FCNs in area of documentation.
An easy format of documentation needs to be adopted by FCNs
Consider exploring free tools or paid documentation tools available for FCNs.
Continuing Education is needed on the long term benefits of FCN documentation
19. Questionnaire
Please help me by completing the following quick questionnaires after reading this
power point (only five drop down, multiple choice / multiple response type
questions with optional explanations).
It takes about 3-5 minutes of your time. Thank you in advance!
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/F6XXKT3
After completing the survey, you will be able to see anonymous results of your
colleagues’ response to their documentation habits….
It is fun to see other FCNs response in comparison to yours.
If you would like to read the complete literature review of this presentation,
please email the writer at yisaact@gmail.com
Thank you! God bless your service to your communities.
20. References
Brown, A. (2006). Documenting the Value of Faith Community Nursing: 2. Faith Nursing Online. Creative Nursing, 12(2), 13.
Buijs, R., & Olson, J. (2001). Parish nurses influencing determinants of health. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 18 (1),
13–23.
Dyess, S., Chase, S., and Newlin, K. 2010. "State of research for Faith Community Nursing 2009." Journal of Religion & Health
49, no. 2: 188-199. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed July 3, 2015).
Geller, K. (2007). Advice of counsel. Liability is an issue for a community nurse. Rn, 70(4), 56.
Miller, S., & Carson, S. (2010). A Documentation approach for Faith Community Nursing. Creative Nursing, 16(3), 122-131. doi:
10.1891/1078-4535.16.3.122
Monay, V., Mangione, C. M., Sorrell-Thompson, A., & Baig, A. A. (2010). Services delivered by Faith-Community Nurses to
individuals with elevated blood pressure. Public Health Nursing, 27(6), 537-543. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1446.2010.00881.x
Parker, W. (2004). How well do parish nurses document? Journal of Christian Nursing, 21(2), 13.
Rydholm, L. (2006). Documenting the value of Faith Community Nursing: Saving hundreds, making cents - A study of current
realities. Creative Nursing, 12(2), 10-12.
Rydholm, L., Moone, R., Thornquist, L., Alexander, W., Gustafson, V., & Speece, B. (2008). Care of community-dwelling older
adults by faith community nurses. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 34(4), 18-31. doi:10.3928/00989134-20080401-09
Slutz, M. (2011). Westberg Symposium's documentation playroom. Parish Nurse Perspectives, 10(1), 6.
