ABSTRACT
Dispor de diagnoÌsticos de enfermagem que respondam aÌ complexidade do desenvolvimento infantil (DI) eÌ fundamental para subsidiar o enfermeiro na elaboraçaÌo de planos de cuidado integral aÌ criança. O objetivo deste trabalho foi apresentar a anaÌlise do conteuÌdo de treÌs novos diagnoÌsticos sobre DI para a NANDA-I. Pesquisa metodoloÌgica, de meÌtodo misto. Etapa quantitativa com juiÌzes, mediante questionaÌrio estruturado, com anaÌlise de concordaÌncia simples; e etapa qualitativa de anaÌlise das discordaÌncias em grupo focal com peritos, para obtençaÌo de consenso. Dezoito juiÌzes responderam ao questionaÌrio, com concordaÌncia acima de 80% para os diagnoÌsticos "Atraso no Desenvolvimento Infantil" e "Risco de Atraso no Desenvolvimento Infantil"; o diagnoÌstico "DisposiçaÌo para Desenvolvimento Infantil Melhorado" teve 61% de concordaÌncia do enunciado e acima de 80% na maioria das caracteriÌsticas definidoras. Oito peritos analisaram as discordaÌncias ateÌ produçaÌo de consensos. A elevada concordaÌncia dos juiÌzes e consenso dos peritos validaram o conteuÌdo dos diagnoÌsticos propostos.
Having nursing diagnoses which answer to the complexity of child development (CD) is fundamental for nurses to ground the formulation of comprehensive care to children. The objective of the present study was to present a content analysis of three new diagnoses about CD for the NANDA-I. It consisted of a methodological, mixed- method study. The quantitative phase was carried out with judges and a structured questionnaire, with simple concordance analysis, and the qualitative phase of the analysis of discrepancies was performed in a focus group, with experts, to obtain a consensus. Eighteen judges answered the questionnaire, and analysis of the results showed an agreement higher than 80% for the "Delayed Child Development" and "Risk for Delayed Child Development" diagnoses; the "Readiness for Enhanced Child Development" diagnosis achieved 61% of agreement regarding the statement and more than 80% of concordance in most defining characteristics. Eight experts analyzed disparities until consensuses were reached. The high agreement among judges and consensus among experts validated the content of the suggested diagnoses.