NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Evaluation of Literature Table Assignment

Whether planned or unplanned, admitting a patient to inpatient care is a complex process that necessitates coordination among physicians, nurses, registration/admitting staff, and others within the organization. In my department, we are currently tracking how long it takes for a patient to be admitted from Day Surgery to inpatient after physician orders have been entered. Some of the difficulties we have encountered include inpatient rooms not being cleaned promptly after discharge and difficulty providing SBAR handoff to inpatient nurses due to a lack of availability (nurse off the unit, on lunch break etc.). Intra-hospital delays, according to Madan (2018), are common and are associated with higher healthcare costs. Madan (2018) went on to explain that the primary cause of this is a lack of inter-departmental coordination.

There are several reasons why translating research into practice can be difficult. Curtis et al. (2017), for example, cited insufficient knowledge about the research process, a lack of competence in reading and evaluating research or scientific articles and reports, a lack of time, a lack of knowledge of statistical analyses, and, in some cases, a lack of authority to change practice, a lack of access to research, insufficient resources to implement change, and a lack of support from staff and colleagues. As a result, policymakers, researchers, and clinicians must be reminded that better health can only be achieved through healthcare that is both scientifically and operationally sound in order to ensure the best possible care and treatment reaches the patient.

The purpose of this assignment is to provide research evidence in support of the PICOT you developed for your selected topic.

Conduct a search for 10 peer-reviewed, translational research articles published within the last 5 years that demonstrate support for your PICOT. You may include previous research articles from assignments completed in this course. Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” provided to evaluate the articles and explain how the research supports your PICOT.

Once your instructor returns this assignment, review the feedback and make any revisions necessary. If you are directed by your instructor to select different articles in order to meet the assignment criteria or to better support your PICOT, make these

changes accordingly. You will use the literature evaluated in this assignment 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.

Order an original top nursing paper specifically for you on NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Evaluation of Literature Table Assignment

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

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Evaluation of Literature Table Assignment

Get help with nursing assignment

Translational research is a practical and goal oriented approach to solving population health problems. Covid 19 poses serious threats to human health and has led to massive loss of life as a result of complications such as breathing problems. Xie et al (2020) during a study conducted in Wuhan China found an association between hypoxemia and in-hospital mortality among patients admitted with Covid 19. Oxygenation was therefore adopted to avert deaths due to hypoxemia among patients who tested for the disease. As in the case of Covid 19, finding a suitable intervention for emerging illnesses may prove a challenge and lead to loss of life as well (NIH, 2020). When such illnesses occur and vital organs such as the lungs and heart are affected, it can be frustrating when people lose life while the medics work to figure out how to manage a disease. Translational research can help bridge the gap through designing and testing machines that help perform the functions of vital organs prolonging life as doctors find out what to do.

For instance, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is used to pump oxygen into the blood of patients outside the body when the affected lung or heart rests. Similar to the human lung the machine takes up carbon dioxide, oxygenates the blood and warms it to body temperature before it is pumped back (UCSF, n.d.). Translational research presents an opportunity to improve on the machine for ease of use through translational research so that death as a result of hypoxemia caused by Covid 19 can be averted. Additional translational research may be used to develop and test other artificial organs that can be used in the event that patients do not find a matching donor when in need of a transplant. This would be very helpful in improving quality of health care services offered and reduces medical errors due to panic when confronted with medical emergencies.

Study Design 10.0% The study design for one or more article is omitted. The study design for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout. The study design is indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies. The study design is adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. A thorough and accurate discussion on the study design for each article is presented.

Setting and Sample 10.0% The setting and sample are omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting and sample are indicated for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout. The setting and sample are indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies. The setting and sample are adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. The setting and sample in which the researcher conducted the study are detailed and accurate for each article.

Methods 10.0% Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete. The method of study is presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout. The method of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. A thorough and accurate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

Analysis and Data Collection 10.0% Analysis and data collection for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the analysis and data collection are incomplete. Analysis and data collection are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout. Analysis and data collection for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies. An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. A thorough and accurate discussion on the analysis and data collection for each article is presented.

Outcomes and Key Findings 10.0% Outcomes and key findings for one or more articles are omitted. Overall, the outcomes and key findings are incomplete. Outcomes and key findings are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout. Outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies. An adequate discussion on outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. A thorough and accurate discussion on the outcomes and key findings collection for each article are presented.

Recommendations 10.0% Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Researcher recommendations are accurately and thoroughly described for each article.

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal 10.0% An explanation of how the article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is omitted for one or more of the articles. The explanation for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete. An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete. A general explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is generally evident. An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Adequate support for the evidence-based project proposal is demonstrated. A detailed explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is clearly evident.

Topic 5 DQ 1

Identify either a safety or quality improvement initiative related to improving population health. Explain how translational research can influence the development of the initiative. Include a specific example to support your response.

Re: Topic 5 DQ 1
Discussion Question

Preventing catheter-related infections is an essential quality improvement technique that can be incorporated by healthcare providers to enhance population health. Patients in post-operative units are at risk of nosocomial infections due to the ineffectiveness of acute care services clouded by medical errors (Malek & Raad, 2020). A healthcare approach towards controlling the spread of these infections could significantly lower the morbidity and mortality rates of patients in acute care settings. Improper care for catheters could lead to vital health consequences especially for older adults or patients with comorbid illnesses (Malek & Raad, 2020). One example of a quality improvement initiative to prevent catheter-related infections is the introduction of hand hygiene protocols for both the patients and the providers. The hand, other body parts, and hospitals surfaces are critical agents of spreading these infections; therefore, a proper sanitation program would reduce these occurrences and promote population health.

Translational research can significantly influence the development of catheter-related prevention programs. This type of study focuses more on the practicality of medical concepts rather than just formulating foundations for knowledge development (Molas-Gallart et al., 2016). For instance, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) five handwashing moments is an example of a scientifically proven procedure for eliminating pathogens and harmful germs on the hand. The implementation of T3 could significantly improve the adoption of this technique for system-wide change which is vitally required especially for patients and providers in acute care settings. Moreover, the use of T3 would improve the dissemination and implementation of research that supports perceptions and facts on the importance of hand hygiene in preventing catheter-related infections.

References

Malek, A. E., & Raad, I. I. (2020). Preventing catheter-related infections in cancer patients: a review of current strategies. Expert review of anti-infective therapy, 18(6), 531-538.

Molas-Gallart, J., D’Este, P., Llopis, O., & Rafols, I. (2016). Towards an alternative framework for the evaluation of translational research initiatives. Research Evaluation, 25(3), 235-243.

NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Evaluation of Literature Table Assignment