NUR 550 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project PICOT Paper

NUR 550 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project PICOT Paper

NUR 550 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project PICOT Paper

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper

The promotion of safety, quality, and efficiency is important in nursing practice. The achievement of these care outcomes depends largely on the interventions that nurses utilize in patient care. Evidence-based interventions are effective in minimizing patient harm and enhancing quality and efficiency of care. Generally, nurses should demonstrate competencies in translating evidence into practice. Safety issues such as medication administration errors threaten the health and wellbeing of the patients. Medication administration errors have significant adverse effects on the health of the patients. They include prolonged hospital stay, unintended harm, increased costs of care, and mortality. Health information technologies are effective in preventing and reducing medication administration errors. Therefore, this project proposes using integrated health information systems to reduce the risk and rate of medication administration errors in critically ill patients.

Problem Statement

Patients in critical condition are increasingly vulnerable to errors in the care process, including medication administration errors. Medication administration errors are flaws in medication administration that result in a difference between the drugs given and what was supposed to be administered. Medication administration errors are common in critically ill patients’ care due to factors such as multiple medication administration, complex patient care needs, unpredictability in health status, and distractions (Barakat & Franklin, 2020). Medication administration errors have a negative impact on patient health by causing unintended harm, prolonging hospital stays, increasing healthcare costs, and increasing operational costs in healthcare due to increased resource utilization (Devin et al., 2020). Because of their primary role in medication administration, nurses are responsible for the majority of medication administration errors (Alomari et al., 2020). Medication administration errors have been on the rise at the project site. Despite this, it has not investigated potential interventions to address the problem, such as the use of integrated health information systems. Evidence suggests that integrated health information systems are extremely effective at preventing and reducing medication errors (Jheeta & Franklin, 2017). As a result, there is a need for its use on the project site to promote safety, quality, and efficiency in patient care, which is the project’s focus.

Refer to the PICOT you developed for your evidence-based practice project proposal. If your PICOT required revision, include those revisions in this assignment. You will use your PICOT paper for all subsequent assignments you develop as part of your evidence-based practice project proposal in this course and in NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Also Read: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT

Write a 750-1,000-word paper that describes your PICOT.

1. Describe the population’s demographics and health concerns.
2. Describe the proposed evidence-based intervention and explain how your proposed intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health care equity for the population of focus.
3. Compare your intervention to previous practice or research.
4. Explain what the expected outcome is for the intervention.
5. Describe the time for implementing the intervention and evaluating the outcome.
6. Explain how nursing science, social determinants of health, and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population.
7. Create an Appendix for your paper and attach the PICOT. Be sure to review feedback from your previous submission and revise your PICOT accordingly.
8. Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to ensure that your paper adheres to APA style and formatting criteria and general guidelines for academic writing. Include the completed checklist as the final appendix at the end of your paper.

Refer to the “Evidence-Based

Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

You are required to cite at least four to six peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

MBA-MSN; MSN-Nursing Education; MSN Acute Care Nurse Practitioner-Adult-Gerontology; MSN Family Nurse Practitioner; MSN-Health Informatics; MSN-Health Care Quality and Patient Safety; MSN-Leadership in Health Care Systems; MSN-Public Health Nursing NUR 550 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project PICOT Paper

MS Nursing: Public Health

MS Nursing: Education

MS Nursing: Acute Care Nurse Practitioner

MS Nursing: Family Nurse Practitioner

MS Nursing: Health Care Quality and Patient Safety

4.1: Synthesize nursing science, determinants of health, and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data in the management of population health.

In research design, the distinction between reliability and validity is typically based on the consistency and accuracy of a measure. Although both reliability and validity are used to evaluate and assess the quality of a research study, in terms of research design, reliability is typically the more important of the two (Heale & Twycross, 2015). On the one hand, dependability can be assessed using any of the four methods listed below: the internal consistency test, the test-retest technique, the split-halves method, or the alternative-form test (Heale & Twycross, 2015). For example, while testing the system’s internal consistency, one would expect to measure the correlation between the original metrics and the alternative measures. In contrast, reliability quantifies the proportion of actual variation to total variation from a statistical standpoint. Validity, on the other hand, assesses how much of the overall variation is accounted for by shared variance; this determines the measure’s accuracy, which can be determined using one of three distinct approaches. This category includes validation techniques such as content validation, contrast validation, and criterion-related validation (Heale & Twycross, 2015). For example, content validation attempts to assess the quality of the items included in a research test.

Patient falls are one of the difficulties that can be avoided in hospitals by implementing evidence-based clinical interventions that are both feasible and effective. Morgan and colleagues (2017) used variables such as teamwork, communication activities, coaching, and engagements to examine the relationship between patient falls and intentional rounding in the context of translational research. The researchers specifically looked at how these factors affected patient falls. In terms of the dependability of the findings of this investigation, the possibility of making mistakes while establishing the connection between the various measurements is extremely low. activities, support, and involvement, for example, all have an impact on the level of collaboration that exists between patients and those who provide care. Furthermore, Morgan et al. (2017) validated the content of their study by analyzing the relationship between staff engagement, teamwork, and patient falls using the iterative Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) methodology. This is because these evaluation methods measured exactly what they were supposed to measure. As a result, the characteristics of reliability and validity were taken into account in the translation research study that was conducted.

Expected Outcome for Intervention 10.0% The expected outcome is for the intervention is omitted. The expected outcome is for the intervention is incomplete. The expected outcome is for the intervention is summarized. More information and supporting evidence is needed. The expected outcome for the intervention is explained using sufficient evidence. The expected outcome for the intervention is thoroughly explained using substantial evidence. NUR 550 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project PICOT Paper

Time Estimated for Implementing Intervention and Evaluating Outcome 10.0% A description of the timeline is not included. A description of the timeline is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the timeline is included but lacks evidence. A description of the timelines is complete and includes a sufficient amount of evidence. A description of the timeline is extremely thorough with substantial evidence.

Support for Population Health Management for Selected Population (C 4.1) 10.0% Explanation of how nursing science; social determinants of health; and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population is omitted. Explanation of how nursing science; social determinants of health; and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population is incomplete. There are major inaccuracies. Explanation of how nursing science; social determinants of health; and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population is summarized. More information and support are needed. Explanation of how nursing science; social determinants of health; and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population is adequate. Some detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Explanation of how nursing science; social determinants of health; and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data are applied or synthesized to support population health management for the selected population is thorough. The narrative is insightful and demonstrates an understanding of how the various aspects contribute to population health management for selected populations.

Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Appendix 5.0% The appendix and required resources are omitted. The APA Writing Checklist and PICOT are attached, but an appendix has not been created. The paper does not reflect the use of the APA Writing Checklist during development. The APA Writing Checklist and PICOT are attached in the appendix. The APA Writing Checklist was generally used in development of the paper, but some aspects are inconsistent with the paper format or quality. The APA Writing Checklist and PICOT are attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development of the paper. The APA Writing Checklist and PICOT are attached in the appendix. It is clearly evident by the quality of the paper that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development.

Required Sources 5.0% Sources are not included. Number of required sources is only partially met. Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Number of required resources is met. Sources are current and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Format 10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Topic 4 DQ 1

Distinguish between reliability and validity in research design. Using a translational research article from your graphic organizer, analyze the methods and results sections to discuss reliability and validity as it relates to the translational research. Include the permalink to the article in your reference.

A data collection tool that I could use for my research would be that of data reporting from using hospital/clinic records as my source of data. This would help give me more accurate information on whether education on cervical cancer and screening options increased cervical cancer screening rates in my population. This would allow me to not have to use self-reporting as a means of my data. A barrier that could arise would be that of the clinics/hospitals allowing access to the participants health records. I could use translational research to potentially overcome barriers that may arise during data collection by it allowing for opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration to help with any knowledge gaps there may be (Diptyanusa & Hasanbasri, 2020). With this, it would be explaining to clinics and/or hospitals the importance of the information that is needing to be collected and how the information will be used to translate findings into daily practice so that they understand the reasoning behind the data why the data is needed. It should be explained that the research is to help achieve medical advances. With the lack of involvement and interdisciplinary interactions, it can deplete the translational ability of research (Diptyanusa & Hasanbasri, 2020).

The best type of translational research to address this barrier would be that of phase 5 or T5 research. The reason I chose this type of translational research is because it involves translation to the community and population level outcomes (Titler,2018). This would be the best type also because my research is based on a population of ethnic minority women in general versus a single ethnic population. Strategies that I would use to provide an understanding of my chosen type of translational research to gather collaborative support would be to explain why cervical cancer screening in important to all women including those of all ethnic minorities in order to decrease the incidence and mortality of cervical cancer among this population. I would also explain that the earlier stage cervical cancer is caught, the better the outcomes would be, and the costs of healthcare would be less than if cervical cancer was found in the later stages. I would also show data of survival rates of this cancer when found in the earlier stages versus the later stages which would show the importance of why this research is needed at a community level versus a single population level.

References:

Diptyanusa, A. & Hasanbasri, M. (2020). Lost in translation: Barriers and progress in harnessing basic medical science into community practice in Indonesia. Translational Medicine s, 5, 16. doi:10.1186/s41231-020-00070-1

Titler, M. (2018). Translation research in practice: An introduction. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 23(2), 1-1. doi:10.3912/OJIN.Vol23No02Man01

Re: Topic 4 DQ 1

Great post Listra. I am very interested in your research topic. Patient falls are a serious issue and in fact 30-50% of patient falls result in some form of injury (Morris & O’Riordan, 2017). My first job as a nurse was working on a neuro/stroke floor. When I started, we had the highest fall rate of a very large hospital. There were certain nurses that had more patient falls than others and I realized quickly the reason why. They were not as attentive to their patients and were not making frequent rounds. I still even dream about those bed alarms, because as soon as I heard one, I was walking very quickly if not running to that room, even if it was not my patient. Teamwork and engagement are crucial for patient safety.

References

Morris, R., & O’Riordan, S. (2017). Prevention of falls in hospital. Clinical Medicine, 17(4), 360–362. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.17-4-360

Topic 4 DQ 2

Identify a data collection tool you could use for your research. Consider how you could employ translational research to potentially overcome barriers, which may arise during data collection. Identify the best type of translational research to address this barrier and provide rationale for the type you have chosen. What strategies would you employ to provide an understanding of your chosen type of translational research and to gather collaborative support?

Re: Topic 4 DQ 2
One data collection tool that can be utilized for research is a questionnaire that includes a comprehensive five-point Likert scale. Likert scales are widely used in research to obtain insight into participants’ opinions, attitudes, or behaviors (Awang et al., 2016). The data acquired can be analyzed to measure the frequency of an occurrence, for example how often are patients engaging in positive behaviors that influence blood pressure control.

Translational research is knowledge obtained from basic sciences and is applied in clinical and community settings (Vukotich, 2016). T0 is basic biomedical research that involves the use of preclinical and animal studies (Fort et al., 2016). Simply stated, T0 is basic scientific discovery that focuses on identification of the needs and concerns of individuals in a community or clinical setting. Translational research, specifically T0 translational research can overcome challenges in data collection, for example recruitment of participants. Because T0 translational research does not involve human subjects, recruitment of participants is not required.

One interesting method that has been found to be effective in understanding translation research is the Translational Journal Club. This organization educates PhD and MD/PhD trainees in their graduate year regarding the process of translation of research from discovery to dissemination and implementation employing a team-based approach (Feghali-Bostwick et al., 2019). According to Feghali-Bostwick et al. (2019), this method proved to be successful in assisting trainees with understanding translational research while working cohesively as a team.

References

Awang, Z., Afthanorhan, A. & Mamat, M. (2016). The Likert scale analysis using parametric based Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Computational Methods in Social Sciences, 13-21.

Feghali-Bostwick, C., Harvey, J., Hasseler, C., Lee-Chavarria, D., & Halushka, P. (2019). A team-based translational journal club: Understanding the translational research highway. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 3(6), 291–294. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.414

Fort, D. G., Herr, T. M., Shaw, P. L., Gutzman, K. E., & Starren, J. B. (2017). Mapping the evolving definitions of translational research. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 1(1), 60-66. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2016.10

Vukotich, C. J., Jr. (2016). Challenges of T3 and T4 translational research. Journal of Research Practice, 12(2). Retrieved from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/552/454

Solution Overview

There is immense progress in healthcare in pursuit of understanding the pathology of communicable diseases and how multi-drug resistant infectious diseases are spread from one person to another in hospitals. There is also evidence to support that the hands of healthcare providers are the main source of HAIs among critically ill patients (Fox et al., 2015). This finding promotes the need to conduct further research on how to prevent HAIs in hospitals by observing basic hygiene principles.

In most hospitals, handwashing is the most important and effective infection control procedure that prevents transmission of pathogens from person to person. According to the findings by the WHO, handwashing with soap and water has a scientific basis and the most appropriate intervention that reduces the transmission costs of pathogens and the rates of HAIs (Haverstick et al., 2017). Benchmark – Part A: Population Health Research and PICOT Statement When combined with other infection control strategies, handwashing produces better results.            

Clinical Question/PICOT Statement

Among hospitalized patients aged 18 years or older (P), how does washing hands using soap and water (I) compared to using hand sanitizers(C), help to reduce incidences of HAIs (O) within 3 months (T)?

Health Equity

As highlighted by King et al. (2016), the CDC published revised guidelines and policies in 2002 on handwashing practices in healthcare settings that all healthcare organizations are required to adhere to. The guidelines strongly recommend that healthcare providers use hand rubs and alcohol sanitizers to decontaminate hands between each non-soiled patient and wash hands using clean running water and soap for visibly contaminated or soiled hands. Benchmark – Part A: Population Health Research and PICOT Statement.