NURS 8114 Week 2 Discussion: Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues

Walden University – NURS 8114 Week 2 Discussion: Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues

NURS 8114 at Walden University. Exploring Middle Range Theory and Framing Practice Issues

NURS 8114 Week 2 Discussion: Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues

You will begin this Discussion by identifying a practice issue that will be your frame of reference as you analyze the theoretical basis of nursing practice. Be aware that your choice can potentially carry through the course, as you will continue to address this issue in the context of other types of theories in Week 3. This practice issue can also be one focus of your Module 3 exploration of evidence-based practice and quality improvement, and your Module 4 investigation of a critical practice question. Consequently, as you prepare for this Discussion, think carefully about your example for connecting middle range nursing theories to patient care.

To prepare the Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues Paper:

• Analyze your nursing practice for issues of particular interest or concern to you. Identify one issue as the focus of your application of theory to practice.
• Review the Week 2 Learning Resources to identify specific middle range theories that may apply to your practice issue.
• Choose at least two middle range theories that might be most relevant and valuable in addressing your practice issue.
• Search the Walden Library for scholarly articles that address application of middle range theories to practice issues.
• Consider how to frame your focus practice issue in terms of the middle range theories that you have selected.

With these thoughts in mind …

By Day 3 of Week 2

Post an explanation of your practice issue. Then, describe two middle range theories that are most valuable in addressing this issue and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ posts.

By Day 6 of Week 2

Respond to at least two colleagues on 2 different days by suggesting other middle-range theories for them to consider. Support your recommendations with at least one scholarly article to share with each colleague.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 2 Discussion Rubric

Top nursing paper writers on hand to assist you with assignment : NURS 8114 Week 2 Discussion: Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues

Get assistance with your nursing paper

Post by Day 3 of Week 2 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 2

Morgan Coleman

Week 2 Blog

Top of Form

Middle range theories are theories that are less comprehensive and more specific than the broader grand theory. They have a limited number of concepts and will usually produce a testable hypothesis (McEwen & Ellis, 2019, p. 210). These middle range theories can be used to address a multitude of issues in most, if not all, nursing practices.

An issue I’ve faced in my practice as a psychiatric registered nurse is performance of the least intrusive physical restraint to subdue aggressive patients as well as limiting its use. This is an issue because many patients, some with a history of physical and sexual abuse, can be triggered and behaviors escalated through physical touch and/or invasion of personal space.

A middle range theory that is valuable in addressing this issue is The Tidal Model. The Tidal Model “emphasizes the fluid nature of human experience characterized by change and unpredictability” (McEwen & Ellis, 2019, p. 225). It focuses on self-empowerment and focused risk assessments. This is particularly beneficial to the issues of restrictions in mental health patients because it initiates an active role in patients to identify and vocalize triggers through self-awareness. Focused risk assessments also provide staff with the tools needed to identify patients of abuse who may need modified forms of physical restriction or restricted use. For example, a risk assessment to identify patients of physical abuse may be gathered for each new admit.

Another middle range theory that could be useful to my physical restriction issue is The Transitions Theory. A major concept of this theory is the transfer of experiences between nurse and patient and the development of safety interventions during this transfer (McEwen & Elis, 2019, p. 231). This is important to my issue because of the need for a dynamic transfer of educational experiences and therapeutic flow of communication between patient and nurse in order to identify proper safety interventions in times of stress. This will minimize the need for physical restraints and present alternative methods for sensitive patient populations. For example, it may be found through the transfer of experiences between nurse and patient that the patient is calmed through soft music. Soft music can then be utilized as a safety intervention when and if the patient becomes aggressive.

 NURS 8114 Discussion Exploring Middle Range Theories and Framing Practice Issues Rubric

		Excellent 90%–100%	Good 80%–89%	Fair 70%–79%	Poor 0%–69%
Main Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.		Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources.	Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references.	Points Range: 31 (31%) – 34 (34%) Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Cited with fewer than two credible references.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 30 (30%) Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible references.
Main Posting: Writing		Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Posting: Timely and full participation		Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Posts main Discussion by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date.
First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
First Response: Writing		Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
First Response: Timely and full participation		Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		Points Range: 9 (9%) – 9 (9%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Second Response: Writing		Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%) is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response: Timely and full participation		Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_8114 _Discussion_ Rubric