Chat with us, powered by LiveChat NR 449 CCN WK 7 The Patient Safety in Hospitalized Setting Presentation | Gen Paper
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

The Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project is the final of the three Required Uniform Assignments in this course and is due this week. It builds upon and utilizes information gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this assignment is twofold:

  • To provide a solution to a clinical problem using the EBP process, and
  • To demonstrate presentation skills for a group of peers.

NR449 Evidence-Based Practice
RUA: Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project Guidelines
Purpose
The Group Presentation is the final of the three assignments in this course. It builds upon and utilizes information
gathered and reported in the first two assignments. The purpose of this assignment is two-fold: a) to provide a solution
to a clinical problem using the EBP process, and b) to demonstrate presentation skills for a group of peers.
Course outcomes: This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes.
CO 1: Examine the sources of knowledge that contribute to professional nursing practice. (PO 7)
CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies. (POs 4 and 8)
CO 3: Identify ethical issues common to research involving human subjects. (PO 6)
CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and clinical significance related to evidence-based practice.
(POs 4 and 8)
CO 5: Recognize the role of research findings in evidence-based practice. (POs 7 and 8)
Due date: Your faculty member will inform you when this assignment is due. The Late Assignment Policy applies to
this assignment.
Total points possible: 240 points
Preparing the assignment (Online Students Only)
1. Follow these guidelines when completing this online assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have
questions.
a. Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists
the nursing profession.
b. Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation.
c. The final presentation will consist of 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable.
Preparing the assignment (Campus Students Only)
1.
Follow these guidelines when completing this on-campus assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have
questions.
a. Each group will have 15 minutes to present on their topic.
b. Presentations will give a brief overview of the topic, followed by examples of how the topic influences or assists
the nursing profession.
c. Each student will have an opportunity to present (speak).
d. Each student will contribute two to three slides for the group presentation.
e. Students will be prepared to have 10–12 PowerPoint slides and may include handouts, if applicable.
2.
Include the following sections:
a. Content (125 points/52%)
• Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice.
• Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, barriers encountered, and what is still
needed.
• Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue.
• Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence.
• Findings are clearly identified.
• Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and addresses feasibility issues.
• Suggestions for implementation.
• Conclusion of content findings.
b. Delivery (40 points/17%)
NR449_RUA_Evidence-Based_Practice_Change_Group_Project_Guidelines_Sept20
1
NR449 Evidence-Based Practice
RUA: Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project Guidelines
(Online Students Only)
• Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. Speak directly with faculty for online
Canvas submission process.
• Evidence of participation by all group members.
(Campus Students Only)
• Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation.
• Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all group members.
• Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm
is present for all group members.
• All group members effectively use notes and do not read from slides.
• Participation by all group members.
c. Slide Presentation (60 points/25% distributed as shown)
• Title slide including group members
• Introductory slide with the clinical problem
• Additional slides illustrating key points
• Conclusion slide
• Reference slide in current APA format
• Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space
• Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references
***Optional handouts may be included to provide information for the audience to keep.
d. Peer Evaluation (15 points/6%)
• Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive feedback.
• Equal work: Did equal share of work.
• Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group organized.
• Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the presentation.
• Team membership skills: Assisted group members.
• Time: Met all deadlines.
For writing assistance (APA, formatting, or grammar) visit the APA Citation and Writing page in the online library.
Please note that your instructor may provide you with additional assessments in any form to determine that you fully
understand the concepts learned in the review module.
2
NR449_RUA_Evidence-Based_Practice_Change_Group_Project_Guidelines_Sept20
2
NR449 Evidence-Based Practice
RUA: Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project Guidelines
Grading Rubric Criteria are met when the student’s application of knowledge demonstrates achievement of the outcomes for this assignment.
Assignment Section and
Required Criteria
(Points possible/% of total points available)
Content
(125 points/52%)
Highest Level of
Performance
High Level of
Performance
Satisfactory
Level of
Performance
125 points
110 points
100 points
Unsatisfactory
Section not
Level of
present in paper
Performance
50 points
0 points
Required criteria
Includes 8
Includes 7
Includes 6
Includes 5 or less No requirements
1. Identification of problem and impact on nursing practice.
requirements for requirements for requirements for requirements for for this section
2. Clearly describe the research process, including what went well, section.
section.
section.
section.
presented.
barriers encountered, and what is still needed.
3. Correlates research findings to identified clinical issue.
4. Summarizes validity of qualitative and quantitative evidence.
5. Findings are clearly identified.
6. Recommends practice change with measurable outcomes and
addresses feasibility issues.
7. Suggestions for implementation.
8. Conclusion of content findings.
Delivery
(40 points/17%)
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
40 points
35 points
25 points
12 points
0 points
Required criteria
Includes 2
Includes 1
No requirements
(Online Students Only)
requirements for
N/A
requirement for
N/A
for this section
Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation. section. (online)
presented.
section. (online)
Speak directly with faculty for online Canvas submission
(online)
process.
Evidence of participation by all group members.
(Campus Students Only)
Follows guidelines for a professional PowerPoint presentation.
Verbal delivery with good volume, pitch, and inflection for all
group members.
Includes 2 or less
Includes 4
Includes 3
Includes 5
Physical delivery with professional dress, good posture, facial requirements for requirements for requirements for requirements for No requirements
expression with eye contact, and enthusiasm is present for all section. (campus) section. (campus) section. (campus) section. (campus) for section
group members.
presented.
All group members effectively use notes and do not read from
(campus)
slides.
Participation by all group members.
NR449_RUA_Evidence-Based_Practice_Change_Group_Project_Guidelines_Sept20
3
NR449 Evidence-Based Practice
RUA: Evidence-Based Practice Change Group Project Guidelines
Assignment Section and
Required Criteria
(Points possible/% of total points available)
Slide Presentation
(60 points/25%)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Highest Level of
Performance
High Level of
Performance
Satisfactory
Level of
Performance
60 points
53 points
47 points
Unsatisfactory
Section not
Level of
present in paper
Performance
23 points
0 points
Required criteria
Includes 7
Includes 6
Includes 5
Includes 4 or less No requirements
Title slide including group members
requirements for requirements for requirements for requirements for for this section
Introductory slide with the clinical problem
section.
section.
section.
section.
presented.
Additional slides illustrating key points
Conclusion slide
Reference slide in current APA format
Effective balance of color, graphics, words, and space
Slide limit: 10–12, inclusive of introduction and references
***Optional handouts may be included to provide information
for the audience to keep.
Peer Evaluation
(15 points/6%)
15 points
1. Completed peer evaluation with respectful and constructive
feedback.
2. Equal work: Did equal share of work.
3. Teamwork: Took the initiative in helping get the group
organized.
4. Communication: Provided ideas for the development of the
presentation.
5. Team membership skills: Assisted group members.
6. Time: Met all deadlines.
13 points
11 points
6 points
0 points
Includes 6
Includes 5
Includes 4
Includes 3 or less No requirements
requirements for requirements for requirements for requirements for for this section
section.
section.
section.
section.
presented.
Total Points Possible = 240 points
NR449_RUA_Evidence-Based_Practice_Change_Group_Project_Guidelines_Sept20
4
RUA 5
1
RUA 5: Analyzing Published Research
Layla Gardy
Chamberlain College of Nursing
NR449: Evidence-Based Practice
Dr. Daniella Thomas
April 2022
RUA 5
2
RUA 5: Analyzing Public Research
The novel COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented, and it is ushering in significant
changes in healthcare delivery, including changes in the care of hospitalized patients. Hospitals
have increased scrutiny to assess the potential risks to patient safety than ever before: universal
masking, screening questions at the door, restricted visitation, temperature checks, all to curb the
spread of the virus. This paper aims to identify and analyze two credible sources to improve
patient safety in the hospitalized environment on managing the COVID-19 pandemic. The
primary goal of this paper is to improve quality and safety in the hospitalized setting through
research and the implementation of evidence. The two articles will thus be used to back up the
arguments and the conclusions drawn about safety in the hospitalized setting during a pandemic.
Clinical Question
The COVID-19 pandemic has increased focused on safety of hospitals during pandemic.
The widespread of the pandemic draws attention to the ability of prevention of nosocomial
infection. This group will focus on analyzing the safety in hospitalized settings with intention of
determining the ability of hospitals to contain spread of COVID-19. Learning about this would
help to understand measures that hospitals are undertaking and how they are helping to contain
spread of COVID-19. By the end of this papers, a conclusion would be drawn on the topic based
on analysis of the two articles selected for this analysis.
RUA 5
3
Description of Findings
Variables
In the first article the independent the main variables that are analyzed in the study are
organizational changes and hospital personnel. Organizational changes in this case are the
independent organizational changes which are changed or manipulated in this study. The
dependent variable in this case are the hospital personnel whose actions are influenced by the
organizational changes. The variables in the second study are different when compared to the
first study. In the second study, the independent variable that is analyzed is the individual health
systems which are manipulated to see the influence they have in the prevention and tracking on
COVID-19 pandemic. While these studies focus on different variables, a commonality between
these studies is that they both analyzed the impact on the variables on COVID-19 management.
At the same time, both of the variables are based on health information and seek to manipulate
health behavior.
Study Design
The first study used a qualitative design to conduct semi-structured interviews with
hospital management, caregivers, and front-line healthcare providers. The research identified 30
participants, including (24 clinicians/administrators, two respondents from a clinical
management for children and a community hospital, and six caregivers/ patients (Penwill et al.,
2021). The second study was a quantitative research design. The authors conducted an extensive
literature review by searching MEDLINE with key terms and identifying 124 full-text sources
reviewed (Golinelli et al. (2020).
RUA 5
4
These two studies designs are different more prominently in the way that the collect
information. In the first study, the use of qualitative design result in the collection of
information in non-numerical form. This is different from the second study, whose main focus is
on gathering data from already been analyzed. Both of these approaches are unique and result to
different research data for each of the study.
Participants
When it comes to participants, these two studies were different. In the first study the
study used a qualitative design to conduct semi-structured interviews with hospital management,
caregivers, and front-line healthcare providers. The research identified 30 participants, including
(24 clinicians/administrators, two respondents from a clinical management for children and a
community hospital, and six caregivers/ patients (Penwill et al., 2021). Convenience sample was
selected from clinical management for children and a community hospital from the six most hit
states (New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Connecticut, Louisiana, and Massachusetts) (Penwill et
al., 2021). The study used a qualitative design to conduct semi-structured interviews with
hospital management, caregivers, and front-line healthcare providers. The research identified 30
participants, including (24 clinicians/administrators, two respondents from a clinical
management for children and a community hospital, and six caregivers/ patients (Penwill et al.,
2021). In the second article the authors sourced information from other research work and there
were no real participants (Golinelli et al. (2020). The authors conducted an extensive literature
review by searching MEDLINE with key terms and identifying 124 full-text sources reviewed
(Golinelli et al. (2020).
Comparison between the two studies, the choose of participants is different which is
influenced by the research design. In the first study, the sampling involved real participants
RUA 5
5
which provides raw data for the researchers to analyze. This is different to the second study
which only relies on previously analyzed data for renewed analysis.
Instruments
The first study used interviews to collect information via videoconference to fully explore
important issues and prepare for analyzing data. Moreover, the study used verbal consent to
participate, analyze and disseminate research findings (Penwill et al., 2021). The second article
utilize extensive literature search for data collection for the study. The use interview questions
are mapped to ensure that they meet the specific competencies. This improves on the validity of
the instruments used and generally ensures that the interview questions correspond to the
underlying competency. On the other hand, the interview questions are structured to ensure that
they can be easily replicated. There was the use of closed questions for majority of the interview
questions as they are easy to quantify especially given the time limit.
Evidence to Support this Clinical Problem
The first article concluded that further studies should be done more with additional
disciplines such as pharmacy and trainees to help in the pandemic recovery (Penwill et al.,
2021). The group chose this article since it helps identify ways to ensure patient safety in
healthcare settings during a pandemic. For instance, developing new policies, assessing hospital
personnel’s mental health, and adopting telehealth in any hospital setting can improve quality
and safety in the hospitalized setting during the crisis. The article concluded that further studies
should be done more with additional disciplines such as pharmacy and trainees to help in the
pandemic recovery (Penwill et al., 2021). The group chose this article since it helps identify
ways to ensure patient safety in healthcare settings during a pandemic. For instance, developing
RUA 5
6
new policies, assessing hospital personnel’s mental health, and adopting telehealth in any
hospital setting can improve quality and safety in the hospitalized setting during the crisis.
The second article thus supports improving quality and safety in the hospitalized setting
through research and implementation of evidence. In this context, hospital administrators are
encouraged to adopt strong design-centric interventions which promote patient-centered care
(Golinelli et al. (2020). Such interventions will observe respect for individual preferences and
values. According to Golinelli et al. (2020), allowing the patients to choose who can visit them
is considered a patient-centered strategy. Visiting a patient in the hospital is an important
part of recovery. However, open and flexible hospital visitation policies may change during
a pandemic to curb the spread of the virus. Such changes may include limiting the level of
open visitations or banning visitations, hence impacting clinical outcomes.
Next Step
One aspect that I would like my group to consider is influence of different aspects
with the pandemic that can influence the spread of the virus in the hospital. Therefore, to
ensure that this is addressed, one of the questions that the team should consider exploring is
“what is the influence of the different variants of COVID-19 influence the information that
is gathered in this analysis? The implication of this research is that it challenges of the
COVID-19 pandemic on the hospitalized environment. Given that the hospital is central to
management of the crisis, it is crucial to analyze the cycle of infection in the hospital to
prevent further infections.
Conclusion
Safety programs to reduce the spread of the virus impact quality and safety in a
healthcare environment. Similarly, with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, open and
RUA 5
7
flexible hospital visitation policies may change across the United States to help curb the
spread of the virus. Generally, lowering infection risk in hospital settings cannot strictly restrict
access to visitors since this may negatively impact patient experience and safety outcomes.
Instead, these two articles show that using evidence-based practices such as telehealth and digital
solutions can help improve patients’ safety in hospitalized settings through improved patient
engagement and even contact tracing at the national level.
RUA 5
8
References
Golinelli, D., Boetto, E., Carullo, G., Nuzzolese, A. G., Landini, M. P., & Fantini, M. P. (2020).
Adoption of digital technologies in health care during the COVID-19 pandemic:
Systematic review of early scientific literature. Journal of Medical Internet
Research, 22(11), e22280. https://doi.org/10.2196/22280
Penwill, N., De Angulo, N. R., Elster, M., Pathak, P., Ja, C., Hochreiter, D., Wilson, K.,
Newton, J., & Kaiser, S. (2021). Changes in pediatric hospital care during the COVID ‐
19 pandemic: A national qualitative study. Health Services Research, 56(S2), 5051. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13818
RUA 5
9
Appendix A
Table 1.1 Evidence Matrix Table
Articl
e
Reference
1
Penwill et
al. (2021).
“Changes in
pediatric
hospital
care during
the COVID ‐
19
pandemic.”
2
Golinelli et
al. (2020).
Adoption of
digital
technologie
s in health
care during
the COVID19
pandemic
Purpose
Hypothesis
Study
Question
Variable
s
Indepen
dent(I)
Depende
nt(D)
What are the
significant
changes
regarding
healthcare
delivery and
hospital
personnel
during the
pandemic?
Oorganiza
tional
changes
Hhospital
personn
el
What is the
impact of
digital
solutions on
individuals and
the overall
health system
during a
pandemic
Iindividua
l
H-health
system
Study
Design
qualitati
ve
Quantita
tive
Sample
Size &
Selection
N- 30
The
convenienc
e sample
was
selected
from
clinical
manageme
nt for
children
and a
community
hospital
from the six
most hit
states (New
York, New
Jersey,
Virginia,
Connecticut
, Louisiana,
and
Massachuse
tts).
N=124
studies
included in
the final
review
Data
Collecti
on
Metho
ds
Focus
Groups
Major Finding(s)
Organizational changes such as
Developing new policies and
assessing hospital personnel by
supporting clinician’s mental
health is essential in promoting
safety in a hospitalized setting
during a pandemic.
.
Digital solutions promote patient
Literatu centered care on the individual
re
level
search and provide new opportunities
To enhance COVID-19 prevention,
detection, tracking in public health
response
RUA 5
10
1
Search Strategy
Layla Gardy
Chamberlain College of Nursing
NR449: Evidence-Based Practice
Dr. Daniella Thomas
March 2022
2
Introduction
Pandemics such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) has highlighted the extent to which
patient safety in the hospitalized setting is essential. Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) is crucial in
assessing the potential risks to patient safety during a pandemic, including how usual care gets
interrupted, how frontline providers get impacted, and the possible errors during medication
administration. The purpose of this paper is to briefly describe search strategies when identifying
credible resources that pertain to patient safety in the hospitalized setting during a pandemic. The
overarching goal of this assignment is to develop a comprehensive PICOT question to enhance
quality and safety and evaluate relevant literature for evidence that will aid in answering the
clinical question.
Clinical Question
Quality improvement and safety programs are better positioned to benefit from a wellstructured PICOT question. With the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak,
hospitals across the United States made the tough decisions to change visitations policies by
restricting visitation to lower the further spread of the disease. Considering that the current
concern is the patient’s safety in the healthcare setting during the pandemic, strategies should be
based on the care that ensures success in their recovery and covers all their needs. In this
assignment, the issue identified to be resolved is the necessity to improve quality of life (QoL)
during a pandemic such as COVID-19.
The assignment will explore the following question: in medically complex patients (P),
how does limiting patient-centered care in advanced care planning (ACP) (I) compared to routine
care practices (C) impact patient satisfaction and the quality of life (O) at three months (T).
3
In this scenario, the practice issue of focus is patient safety in complex patients. According to
AHRQ, medically complex patients are “people with two or more chronic conditions where each
condition may influence the care of the other condition, are commonly cared for in primary care”
(AHRQ, 2021). A significant influx of medically complex patients, including those with
COVID-19 symptoms, is common in primary care and usually has increased medical costs,
higher rates of preventable hospitalizations, and poor clinical outcomes. COVID-19 has further
led to the drastic rise and caused an immediate increase in medically complex clients with
multiple comorbidities.
EBP is crucial in assessing and treating complex patients using various strategies to
enhance effective care. The intervention applied for this issue is the patient-centered
approach. This approach involves giving care that is responsive to and respectful of
individual preferences and values. For instance, open visitation is considered a patientcentered strategy since visitors are primarily care partners or family members who serve as
extended support for what patients may need during the care process. However, due to the
impact of the pandemic, the level of open visitation may be limited or restricted hence may
affect clinical outcomes. The population under investigation is complex patients, representing
the general hospital population. The objective of the research is thus to evaluate the effectiveness
of open visitation versus when patients do not have visitors, as was the case during COVID-19.
Levels of Evidence
Since the aim is to analyze care practices that address improved QoL, only factors
associated with life-threatening conditions get considered. As such, the research did not
consider clients who could not consent to treatment and were on an ‘end-of-life’ trajectory or had
4
completed a formal advance directive. The evidence would be from a randomized control trial
or quantitative study on approaches with a scientific method, which involves direct observation
and self-reporting of nurses when administering medications.
Search Strategy
The project will start by evaluating therapy-based PICOT questions related to complex
patients and searching for relevant databases to identify critical sources of citations that will be
instrumental in answering the question. First, the research will use the CU library to obtain
credible resources to support therapy-based research. The study will apply different databases
such as Medline and CINAHL. The choice for the Medline database is driven by the idea that it
integrates the most subset of PubMed hence providing updated information based on MeSH
terms. Jolley (2020) posits that a good search strategy ensures limiting search results and brings
out the most precise resources.
The search for MeSH terms will help shortlist relevant keywords, including ‘complex
patients,’ ‘patient centered approach,’ ‘open visitation.’ On the other hand, CINAHL will play a
vital role in this project since it suits case studies and is important in obtaining qualitative
evidence (Jolley, 2020). Therefore, the choice for these databases is based on their significance
in providing interventions, hence considered the most appropriate databases for effective
research and solving the PICOT question. These databases give detailed sources for nursing
topics thus considered the most appropriate result-generating databases for a general topic like
advanced care planning and terms like medically complex patients.
5
The selected studies are relevant to the PICOT question and slightly focus on the topic.
The study by Silvera et al. (2021) got selected since it evaluates the overall impact of restricted
visitations on patient experience and safety outcomes. The source can justify the claim that
patients should not be strictly restricted to access to visitors. Moreover, Browne et al. (2020)
focus on managing medically complex patients to provide safe and effective care. Specifically,
these two resources are relevant since they enable the audience to understand the value of
patient visitors on quality outcomes.
Conclusion
Patient experience impacts patient satisfaction and retention. Specifically, patient
satisfaction can be adversely affected when health administration does not observe some aspects
of patient-centered care. Subsequently, applying credible evidence in an EBP model in any
hospital setting can improve patient safety and satisfaction during a pandemic.
6
References
AHRQ. (2021). Complex Patients. Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality. https://www.ahrq.gov/
Browne, M., Bebb, K., Macpherson, A., & Kwasnicki, A. (2020). Managing the medically
complex patient: Risk assessment and information gathering. Primary Dental
Journal, 9(2), 17-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050168420923847
Jolley, J. (2020). Evidence-based practice. Introducing Research and Evidence-Based Practice
for Nursing and Healthcare Professionals, 6388. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329456-4
Silvera, G. A., Wolf, J. A., Stanowski, A., & Studer, Q. (2021). The influence of COVID-19
visitation restrictions on patient experience and safety outcomes: A critical role for
subjective advocates. Patient Experience Journal, 8(1), 3039. https://doi.org/10.35680/2372-0247.1596

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

error: Content is protected !!