NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

Assignment: Evidence-Based Project, Part 4: Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change

The collection of evidence is an activity that occurs with an endgame in mind. For example, law enforcement professionals collect evidence to support a decision to charge those accused of criminal activity. Similarly, evidence-based healthcare practitioners collect evidence to support decisions in pursuit of specific healthcare outcomes. NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

 

In this Assignment, you will identify an issue or opportunity for change within your healthcare organization and propose an idea for a change in practice supported by an EBP approach.

 

To Prepare:

 

Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you critically appraised in Module 4, related to your clinical topic of interest and PICOT.

Reflect on your current healthcare organization and think about potential opportunities for evidence-based change, using your topic of interest and PICOT as the basis for your reflection.

Consider the best method of disseminating the results of your presentation to an audience.

The Assignment: (Evidence-Based Project)

 

Part 4: Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change

 

Create an 8- to 9-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

 

Briefly describe your healthcare organization, including its culture and readiness for change. (You may opt to keep various elements of this anonymous, such as your company name.)

Describe the current problem or opportunity for change. Include in this description the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general.

Propose an evidence-based idea for a change in practice using an EBP approach to decision making. Note that you may find further research needs to be conducted if sufficient evidence is not discovered.

Describe your plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation. NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy.

Describe the measurable outcomes you hope to achieve with the implementation of this evidence-based change.

Be sure to provide APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer reviewed articles you selected to support your thinking.

Add a lessons learned section that includes the following:

A summary of the critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed articles you previously submitted

An explanation about what you learned from completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template (1-3 slides)

By Day 7 of Week 10

Submit Part 4 of your Evidence-Based Project.

 

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

 

Required Readings

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

 

Chapter 7, “Patient Concerns, Choices and Clinical Judgement in Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 219–232)

Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(13), 1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10186

 

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

 

Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001396

 

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

 

Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000483

 

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

 

Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00730.x

 

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

 

The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. (2019). Patient decision aids. Retrieved from https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/

 

Rubric Detail

 

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

 

Name: NURS_6052_Module06_Week10_Assignment_Rubric

Grid View

List View

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Part 4: Disseminating Results

 

Create a 5-minute, 5- to 6-slide narrated PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project:

 

· Be sure to incorporate any feedback or changes from your presentation submission in Module 5.

· Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy.

81 (81%) – 90 (90%)

The narrated presentation accurately and completely summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation is professional in nature and thoroughly addresses all components of the evidence-based project.

 

The narrated presentation accurately and clearly explains in detail how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience, citing specific and relevant examples. NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

 

The narrated presentation accurately and clearly provides a justification that details the selection of this dissemination strategy that is fully supported by specific and relevant examples.

 

The narrated presentation provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources related to the dissemination strategy explained. The narrated presentation fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the presentation.

72 (72%) – 80 (80%)

The narrated presentation adequately summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation is professional in nature and adequately addresses the components of the evidence-based project.

The narrated presentation accurately explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience; some specific examples may be provided.

The narrated presentation accurately provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy and may be supported by specific examples.

 

The narrated presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource related to the dissemination strategy explained. The narrated presentation integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the presentation.

63 (63%) – 71 (71%)

The narrated presentation vaguely, inaccurately, or incompletely summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation may be professional in nature and somewhat addresses the components of the evidence-based project.

The narrated presentation inaccurately or vaguely explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience; inaccurate or vague examples may be provided.

 

The narrated presentation inaccurately or vaguely provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy and may be supported by inaccurate or vague examples.

The narrated presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the dissemination strategy explained. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the presentation.

0 (0%) – 62 (62%)

The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately summarizes the evidence-based project or is missing. The narrated presentation is not professional in nature and inaccurately and incompletely addresses the components of the evidence-based project or is missing.

The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience, no examples are provided, or it is missing.

The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy, no examples are provided, or it is missing.

The narrated presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the dissemination strategy explained or is missing. The presentation fails to integrate any resources to support the presentation.

Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization:

Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

 

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

 

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriptive.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.

 

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

 

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:

 

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6052_Module06_Week10_Assignment_Rubric