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 NUR 550

Trauma occurs when individuals are overwhelmed by circumstances or events and counters them with extreme horror, fear, and helplessness. Excessive stress overwhelms an individual’s coping capacity. Trauma can stem from exposure to abuse, discrimination, neglect, violence, and accidents (Shalaby & Agyapong, 2020). This paper seeks to describe populations with traumatic experiences and an intervention to address the concern and discuss factors that influence health management.

Population’s Demographics and Health Concerns

According to the National Council for Behavioral Health (NCBH), 70% of adults in the U.S. have experienced a traumatic event at least once. Almost all children who observe a parental homicide or sexual assault will develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Likewise, 90% of sexually abused children, 77% who school shootings, and 35% of youths exposed to community violence develop PTSD (NCBH, 2020). Trauma is associated with adverse effects on physical and mental health as well as social and occupational functioning.  Physical effects include headaches, excessive sweating, palpitations, altered bowel patterns, and being easily startled. Mental impact includes fear, anxiety, depression, emotional swings, increased alcohol and drug use, and sleeping difficulties (Mikhail et al., 2018). Furthermore, individuals socially isolate themselves due and have diminished interest in activities.

Proposed Evidence-Based Intervention

The proposed intervention incorporates peer support in trauma-informed care to accelerate the recovery process.  Peer support involves having persons from diverse backgrounds sharing common trauma experiences (Shalaby & Agyapong, 2020). The intervention uses peer support workers, individuals with lived trauma experiences, and who have received special training to be part of the care team. Based on their similar experiences and the shared understanding, patients may trust their peer support worker and be more willing to engage in treatment.

Incorporating peer support supports Healthy People 2020 goal of improving mental health through prevention and ensuring access to appropriate, quality mental health services. The intervention will improve the mental health outcomes of persons with trauma experiences. It will help prevent mental health issues such as anxiety, PTSD, depression, and alcohol and substance use disorders.

Comparison of the Intervention to Previous Practice or Research

Previous practice in trauma-informed care entailed using behavioral health counselors. Crisanti et al. (2019) compared cognitive behavioral therapy intervention groups guided by certified peer support workers with groups led by behavioral health counselors for trauma survivors with PTSD. At six months after baseline, persons in the peer-led sessions had a higher therapeutic alliance and stronger connection than those in the counselor-led sessions. The study shows that peer support can increase patient engagement and ultimately accelerate the recovery process.

Expected Outcome for the Intervention

Incorporating peer support is expected to increase patients’ engagement in treatment and thus accelerating their recovery. Since patients will share their trauma experiences with peer support workers who have experienced similar experiences, it will promote a shared understanding and increase patients’ trust (Shalaby & Agyapong, 2020). Peer support is expected to help patients overcome social isolation caused by trust issues by creating trust between patients and the peer workers.

Time for Implementation and Evaluation of the Outcome

The intervention will be implemented within six months. Patients will be randomly assigned to an intervention or a control group. The intervention group will be assigned to a peer support worker, while the control group will be provided the usual trauma-informed care without peer support. Evaluation will be conducted six months after the implementation of the peer support care. The recovery scores of patients in the intervention group will be compared to those of the control group to evaluate the difference in recovery and outcomes.

Synthesis of Nursing Science, Determinants of Health, and Epidemiologic, Genomic, and Genetic Data in the Management of Population Health

Nursing science is applied to support patients with trauma experiences in line with the principles of safety, respect, and trust. Nursing science is also applied in delivering patient-centered care to improve patient engagement and the quality of trauma-informed care (Fleishman et al., 2019). Social determinants such as living in under-resourced or racially segregated neighborhoods and experiencing food insecurity can result in toxic stress.  Social determinants that should be considered in trauma screening include poverty, neighborhood crime and violence, and racism (Mikhail et al., 2018). Health providers should increase protective factors to mitigate exposure to trauma and environmental factors that contribute to it.

Trauma mainly affects minority racial groups, children, adolescents, and older adults.  The data can be applied in trauma-informed care by emphasizing screening for trauma experiences among high-risk populations. Youssef et al. (2018) found that trauma exposure can be passed to offspring transgenerationally via the epigenetic inheritance mechanism of DNA methylation alterations. The genetic data can be synthesized in trauma-informed care by emphasizing trauma screening to persons whose close relatives were exposed to trauma.

Conclusion

More than 70% of the U.S population has encountered traumatic events such as homicide, sexual assault, shooting, and community violence. Trauma is associated with adverse effects on physical and mental health and impairments in social and occupational functioning. My proposed intervention is to incorporate peer support in trauma-informed care. Peers work together with patients to create relationships where they share their strengths and support each other’s healing. Peer support is expected to increase patient engagement and accelerate recovery. The intervention will be implemented over six months using an intervention and control group.

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 References

Crisanti, A., Murray-Krezan, C., & Reno, J. (2019). Are treatment groups led by peers as effective as groups led by counselors for treating posttraumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder? https://doi.org/10.25302/5.2019.ce.12114484

Fleishman, J., Kamsky, H., & Sundborg, S. (2019). Trauma-informed nursing practice. OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol24No02Man03

Mikhail, J. N., Nemeth, L. S., Mueller, M., Pope, C., & NeSmith, E. G. (2018). The social determinants of trauma: a trauma disparities scoping review and framework. Journal of Trauma Nursing| JTN, 25(5), 266-281.

National Council for Behavioral Health. (2020, July 17). Trauma Infographic. National Council. https://www.thenationalcouncil.org/

Shalaby, R., & Agyapong, V. (2020). Peer support in mental health: Literature review. JMIR mental health, 7(6), e15572. https://doi.org/10.2196/15572

Youssef, N. A., Lockwood, L., Su, S., Hao, G., & Rutten, B. (2018). The Effects of Trauma, with or without PTSD, on the Transgenerational DNA Methylation Alterations in Human Offsprings. Brain sciences, 8(5), 83. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8050083

Engaging in evidence-based practice (EBP) projects is among the most practical interventions for addressing health problems. Nurses use nursing interventions founded on research to enhance health outcomes. This paper describes the population, intervention, and expected outcome. It also explains the implementation time and the application of nursing science, social determinants of health, and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data in supporting the health management of children with obesity.

Click here to ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT ON  Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550

Population’s Demographics and Health Concerns

The focus population for the EBP project is children usually categorized as preschool-aged children (2-5 years) and school-aged children (6-11 years). Preschool-aged children are usually highly dependent on parents’ choices, including nutritional health, hobbies, and general lifestyle. As they move from pre-school to school age, children become somewhat dependent on some choices. They start choosing hobbies and establish relationships that influence their daily habits.

Childhood obesity is a serious health concern in the United States whose prevalence is increasing and putting children at risk of poor health. Skinner et al. (2018) found that childhood obesity’s prevalence is still high in the US since 1 in every 5 children has obesity. As the prevalence of obesity increases, children are more exposed to immediate and long term risks of obesity. Vulnerability to heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer is high in children with obesity (Lindberg et al., 2020). Overall, the quality of health declines and children are not productive as desired.

As the populace, government, and health care providers intensify measures to fight obesity, it is disappointing to experience a proportional risk in risk factors. According to Tester et al. (2018), lifestyle changes characterized by low physical activity are continuously exposing children to obesity. Fast foods’ consumption is another risk factor. Pearson et al. (2020) suggested that sedentary living characterized by too much screen time must be addressed to reduce childhood’s obesity prevalence. Gaming, watching television for extended periods, and social interaction through mobile phones can be blamed for the reduced physical activity among children. Regulation is necessary as parents, educators, and health care providers collaborate to encourage physical activity at homes, schools, and communities.

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550

This is a capstone project class. All the way to NUR 590, we will focus on writing assignments that focus on your PICOT Question. Indeed, we will create the PICOT for you from week 1 of the present class. Kindly trust us with it.

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.

Click here to ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT ON  Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550

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.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

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 – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper SAMPLE

Engaging in evidence-based practice (EBP) projects is among the most practical interventions for addressing health problems. Nurses use nursing interventions founded on research to enhance health outcomes. This paper describes the population, intervention, and expected outcome. It also explains the implementation time and the application of nursing science, social determinants of health, and epidemiologic, genomic, and genetic data in supporting the health management of children with obesity.

Population’s Demographics and Health Concerns

The focus population for the EBP project is children usually categorized as preschool-aged children (2-5 years) and school-aged children (6-11 years). Preschool-aged children are usually highly dependent on parents’ choices, including nutritional health, hobbies, and general lifestyle. As they move from pre-school to school age, children become somewhat dependent on some choices. They start choosing hobbies and establish relationships that influence their daily habits.

Childhood obesity is a serious health concern in the United States whose prevalence is increasing and putting children at risk of poor health. Skinner et al. (2018) found that childhood obesity’s prevalence is still high in the US since 1 in every 5 children has obesity. As the prevalence of obesity increases, children are more exposed to immediate and long term risks of obesity. Vulnerability to heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer is high in children with obesity (Lindberg et al., 2020). Overall, the quality of health declines and children are not productive as desired.

As the populace, government, and health care providers intensify measures to fight obesity, it is disappointing to experience a proportional risk in risk factors. According to Tester et al. (2018), lifestyle changes characterized by low physical activity are continuously exposing children to obesity. Fast foods’ consumption is another risk factor. Pearson et al. (2020) suggested that sedentary living characterized by too much screen time must be addressed to reduce childhood’s obesity prevalence. Gaming, watching television for extended periods, and social interaction through mobile phones can be blamed for the reduced physical activity among children. Regulation is necessary as parents, educators, and health care providers collaborate to encourage physical activity at homes, schools, and communities.

Evidence-Based Intervention

As proposed in the PICOT (Appendix 1), the identified intervention is educating parents and children on reducing screen time and increasing physical activity. Increased screen time increases obesity prevalence since it is associated with too much energy intake and low physical activity (Schwarzfischer et al., 2020). Educating parents and children is expected to trigger a positive behavior change as parents regulate children and children avoid spending too much time on the screens since they understand the implications. The intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health equity for children since it focuses on ensuring that children attain their full health potential. Health equity is achieved when disadvantaged groups are protected from health disparities and helped to acquire a decent living standard. Keeping children free from obesity is a significant step towards achieving this critical goal.

Intervention Comparison to Previous Research

Previous research confirm that parents are responsible for modeling children’s behaviors by regulating screen time, and awareness to embrace this role is necessary. Pearson et al. (2020) found that shortage of parent- and home-focused interventions to address unhealthy behaviors such as intake of energy-dense snack foods and excessive screen time increases childhood obesity rates. Parental confidence and awareness of the association between screen time and unhealthy behaviors are also recommended. Goncalves et al. (2019) found that parental confidence and self-efficacy to reduce screen time is instrumental in addressing overweight problems among children. With research confirming the central role parents play in regulating screen time, it is essential to encourage them to embrace this critical role and serve as role models of healthy behaviors.

Expected Outcome

Educating parents and children on the implications of too much screen time is expected to be the foundation of behavior change. As a nursing intervention, the education program will improve knowledge on the connection between obesity in children and screen time as a risk factor. Minimizing screen time will lead to a proportional reduction in obesity rates among children, which has become a public health concern since its trend has taken an upward trajectory in the past decade (Skinner et al., 2018). The overall outcome is creating a healthy populace by reducing obesity rates among school-age children.

Time for Implementing and Evaluation

Implementation should be immediate. Since the focus population and intervention are known, parents and children’s education on screen time should be done instantly. Doing so will help to achieve the target objective within six months as proposed in the PICOT. Outcome evaluation will be progressive (monthly) and summative (after six months). Progressive evaluation will help to identify areas that need improvement, and summative evaluation will be used to deduce whether the target objectives were achieved.

Applying Nursing Science, SDOH, and Data

Population health management for children applies evidence, tools, and data from different sources. Nursing science helps to develop theories and practical concepts to manage conditions. It provides scientific ways to deliver better health services. Social determinants of health (SDOH) have much to do with living conditions. In this case, health care providers examine how environments where children are born and live, beliefs and socioeconomic status influence obesity and other illnesses and appropriate interventions. Epidemiological data is the basis for determining disease frequency and potential causes. Genomic and genetic data are closely related. Genomic data examines functional information in DNA as genetic data examines the acquired characteristics of children and their influence on health.

In conclusion, children deserve quality health and should be protected from vulnerabilities such as obesity. In response, nurses should use their knowledge and influence to promote quality public health. They should be centrally involved in identifying critical problems that hamper people’s productivity and invent lasting solutions. Addressing childhood obesity by educating parents and children on reducing screen time is an evidence-based lasting solution.

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 References

Goncalves, W. S. F., Byrne, R., Viana, M. T., & Trost, S. G. (2019). Parental influences on screen time and weight status among preschool children from Brazil: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 16(1), 1-8. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186%2Fs12966-019-0788-3

Lindberg, L., Danielsson, P., Persson, M., Marcus, C., & Hagman, E. (2020). Association of childhood obesity with risk of early all-cause and cause-specific mortality: A Swedish prospective cohort study. PLoS Medicine, 17(3), e1003078. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003078

Pearson, N., Biddle, S. J., Griffiths, P., Sherar, L. B., McGeorge, S., & Haycraft, E. (2020). Reducing screen-time and unhealthy snacking in 9–11 year old children: the Kids FIRST pilot randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1-14. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-8232-9

Schwarzfischer, P., Gruszfeld, D., Socha, P., Luque, V., Closa-Monasterolo, R., Rousseaux, D., … & Grote, V. (2020). Effects of screen time and playing outside on anthropometric measures in preschool aged children. PloS One, 15(3), e0229708. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229708

Tester, J. M., Phan, T. L. T., Tucker, J. M., Leung, C. W., Gillette, M. L. D., Sweeney, B. R., … & Eneli, I. U. (2018). Characteristics of children 2 to 5 years of age with severe obesity. Pediatrics, 141(3). doi: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-3228

Skinner, A. C., Ravanbakht, S. N., Skelton, J. A., Perrin, E. M., & Armstrong, S. C. (2018). Prevalence of obesity and severe obesity in US children, 1999–2016. Pediatrics, 141(3). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-3459

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

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.

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NUR-550 NUR-550-O503 Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper 150.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Good (92.00%) Excellent (100.00%)
Content 70.0%
Population Demographics and Health Concerns 5.0% The demographics and health concerns for the population are not described. The demographics and health concerns for the population are incorrect or only partially described. The demographics and health concerns for the population are summarized. More information and supporting evidence are needed. The demographics and health concerns for the population are described using sufficient evidence. The demographics and health concerns for the population are accurate and thoroughly described using substantial evidence.

Proposed Evidence-Based Intervention 13.0% The proposed evidence-based intervention is omitted. The proposed evidence-based intervention is incomplete. It is unclear how the proposed intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health care equity for the population of focus. The proposed evidence-based intervention is outlined. Explanation of how the proposed intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health care equity for the population of focus is general. Some aspects are unclear. More information is needed. The proposed evidence-based intervention is described. Explanation of how the proposed intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health care equity for the population of focus is adequate. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy. The proposed evidence-based intervention is well-developed and clearly described. Explanation of how the proposed intervention incorporates health policies and goals that support health care equity for the population of focus is thorough.

Comparison of Intervention to Current Research 12.0% Comparison of intervention to previous practice or research is omitted. Comparison of intervention to previous practice or research is incomplete. Comparison of intervention to previous practice or research is generally presented. Some areas are vague. Comparison of intervention to previous practice or research is adequately presented. Comparison of intervention to previous practice or research is thorough and clearly presented.

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.

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.

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.

Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%

Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

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.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

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 3 DQ 1

Discuss the ethical guidelines that would need to be implemented when conducting translational research. What are the ethical and legal considerations related to translating research into practice? Discuss what steps you would take as a member of a translational research team in order to establish ethical guidelines for conducting translational research.

Re: Topic 3 DQ 1

Translational Research (TR) looks to implement new practices and guidelines to biomedicine and clinical areas in preventions, treatment and knowledge. Research looks to improve outcomes for patients at the very end of the TR process, in order to obtain such positive outcomes, efficiency in the research process must be correctable (Lopez de la Vieja, 2016). Research can come with high costs during developmental and clinical trials as resources are used in order to observe and maintain safety. However, resources are finite which can considerably stunt the growth of TR. There is also the major consideration of resources being used in a fair and just manner as legal and ethical guidelines must be adhered to. Ethical decision making must contain aspects of justice, equality and quality in terms of respect, dignity, and responsibility during research (Lopez de la Vieja, 2016). Ensuring that resources are not wasted on unnecessary events or complete unfair practices during research should be prioritized just as much as safety measures as patient outcomes depend on the research relaying the most effective interventions for the best, safe outcomes (Lopez de la Vieja, 2016).

During TR, members must ensure that their individuals within clinical trials are consenting while upholding the integrity of knowledge of their participation. Members must also consider potentially harmful and questionable areas that can effectively place high risk in obtaining outcomes (Sofaer & Eyal, 2010). When establishing guidelines to ethical research, members are required to overlook these considerations at every step and interaction as to prevent legal divergence that can cause poor patient outcome which would jeopardize the integrity of the research. Policies and procedures as well as ethics committee consultation can assist in fool-proofing research from breaking ethical guidelines and beneficence (Lopez de la Vieja, 2016).

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 References:

Sofaer N, & Eyal N. (2010). The Diverse Ethics of Translational Research. American Journal of Bioethics, 10(8), 19–30. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/15265161.2010.494214

López de la Vieja, M. T. (2016). Ethics and governance in translational research. Ethics, Medicine and Public Health, 2(2), 256–262. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2016.04.002

Topic 3 DQ 2

Discuss the role of the Institutional Review Board. Discuss ethical research considerations specific to population health. How are respect for the persons, potential benefits and burdens of the research, and justice kept in balance? Provide an example.

Re: Topic 3 DQ 2

The institutional review board is a board utilized prior to initiation of a study to ensure the research being proposed is held to high ethical standards. The FDA regulated IRB boards to formally review and monitor biomedical research involving human beings(FDA, 2019). An IRB holds a role in advance and in periodic review of clinical trials, and research, it also reviews protocols that involve human subjects to protect the human rights during a trials or study. Population health is the looking at the broad distribution of health within population(Nash et al., 2021), to ethically study a population one would have to ensure the study followed the ethics of a whole population, as well as maintaining an equitable benefit to the population in hand. Maintain justice and benefits of a translational study of population would have to maintain the benefit of the study was fair and equitable to all of the population regardless of race or color(Riva & Petrini, 2019). In the translation research of my EBP project looking at quantitative blood loss in postpartum women to identify and treat postpartum hemorrhage early, studies show women of different ethnicity background have a higher risk for PPH. To maintain high ethics the IRB would have to ensure the research around QBL must include and be beneficial for all women no matter race or socioeconomic status. In my research Women of different ethnicities do have barriers to care related to prenatal care predisposing them to higher risk pregnancies but utilizing QBL in every delivery is offered and given to each woman.

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 References

FDA. (2019, September 11). Institutional Review Boards and protection of Human Subjects in Clinical Trials. FDA U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-and-research-cder/institutional-review-boards-irbs-and-protection-human-subjects-clinical-trials

Nash, D. B., MD, MBA, Skoufalos, A., EdD, MS, Fabius, R. J., MD, FACPE, & Oglesby, W. H., Phd, MBA, MSPH, FACHE. (2021). Population Health Creating a Culture of Wellness (3rd ed.) [e-book]. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Riva, L., & Petrini, C. (2019). A few ethical issues in translational research for gene and cell therapy. Journal of Translational Medicine, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-019-02154-5

The need for increased patient safety and quality care implores healthcare providers, especially nurses, to develop evidence-based practice interventions using translational research to prevent and reduce medication administration errors (MAEs). Medication administration errors are a serious safety concern and the use of best practices like application of health information technology approaches can prevent and reduce their occurrence and prevalence in health care settings (Alotaibi & Federico, 2017). The purpose of this assignment is to describe the PICOT developed for the evidence-based practice (EBP) project that entails the use of health information technology by healthcare workers to reduce and prevent the occurrence of medication administration errors among critically-ill patients.

Population’s Demographics and Health Concerns

The critically-ill patients require close monitoring and use different types of medications to ensure that their conditions are stable. Healthcare workers, particularly nurses, commit medication administration n errors (MAEs) that threaten patient safety and quality care delivery. MAEs are a health concern due to the adverse effects that they cause to patients and the need for providers to implement evidence-based practice interventions to address them (Jheeta & Franklin, 2017). These errors cause harm and sometimes not. However, in a majority of cases, they devastate patients and their families as they lead to increased duration of stay in hospitals, poor patient outcomes, and even adverse events like fatalities. Nurses are a crucial part of care provision and have a professional and ethical duty to protect patients against the adverse effects emanating from these errors to guarantee patient safety.

The critically-ill patients need keen monitoring and nurses should be accountable to anything that happens to the patients. They should implement interventions that lead to better protection and quality care delivery aimed at minimizing and preventing the possibility of the errors from happening. Close monitoring requires effective deployment of technology like the use of health information technologies to enhance care delivery.

Proposed Evidence-Based Intervention

The integration of health information technology (HIT) is essential in reducing and preventing the occurrence of medication administration errors. Health information technology improves and transforms healthcare delivery because of the convenience it provides in responding to distress calls by patients. By utilizing interventions like electronic medication administration, barcode scanning and e-prescribing, healthcare workers and other stakeholders can mitigate medication administration errors that may affect critically-ill patients. In their study, Jeffries et al. (2017) observe that monitoring of possible hazardous prescribing is essential in enhancing medications safety. The authors deploy different qualitative realistic evaluation approaches to assess the effects of implementing and adopting use of health information technology models like an electronic medicines optimization system. The findings suggest that health information models improve patient safety by reducing and preventing errors through reviewing patients at risk of adverse drug events.

In their study, Lapkin et al. (2017) evaluate the effectiveness or interventions meant to reduce medication administration errors by synthesizing findings using systematic reviews. The authors suggest that using multifaceted approaches entailing the application of education and risk management strategies alongside barcode technology helps in reducing and preventing medication administration errors. These interventions demonstrate the need to integration other components like double-checking and the effects of interruptions and self-administration. As such, the study shows that despite challenges that may arise in the medication administration process, health information technology interventions like barcoding mitigates the occurrence of errors.

Comparison with Previous Practices

The need to enhance patient safety and quality of care remains a critical aspect of integrating health information technology to reduce and prevent medication errors. In their study, Yogini et al. (2020) assert that errors in medication administration are prevalent and there are many interventions that can help to reduce their occurrence. The study shows that previous practices of not incorporating health information technology have led to serious effects on patient safety and even providers. Another study by Gait et al. (2019) discusses the use of health information technology as compared to previous practices among pharmacists in efforts to reduce medication errors. The authors identify practices like workload, insufficient integration of technology, and disruptive work environment that make it difficult for pharmacists to have accurate prescription and administration of medications. The lack of effective vigilance and close monitoring are previous practices attributed to increased incidences of medication administration errors. Therefore, it is important for providers to implement interventions that will enhance safety of patients and increase the quality of care outcomes. Health information technology integration remains a core aspect of addressing the problem and ensuring that patients are not harmed and providers do not register errors or near misses in the medication process.

Expected Outcomes of the Intervention

At the core of this intervention is to reduce and prevent the occurrence and prevalence of medication administration errors and enhance overall patient safety. The integration of health information technology will result in significant quality and safety outcomes for patients and their healthcare providers. Healthcare workers need to appreciate the significance of HIT as a way of helping them address factors associated with medication administration errors like workload and near misses caused by human weaknesses. The use of health information technology models like barcode scanning will enhance adherence and compliance to evidence-based practice approaches and enable facilities and healthcare workers to address medication process errors.

Period for the Implementation

The intervention will be executed for the duration that critically-ill patients are in hospitals; which implies that medication administration process is not a one-off issue but requires continual adherence and compliance to existing interventions. However, an initial implementation period will focus on the first five days of a patient’s admission or in proportion to the number of days that one will stay in a facility getting medications.

Nursing Science, Social Determinants of Health, Epidemiologic, Genomic and Genetic Data

The chosen population include critically-ill patients and healthcare workers and how both can work to reduce and prevent medication administration errors. Healthcare workers, especially nurses, need to understand the genomic effect of medication errors on patients and integrate evidence-based practice interventions that include health information technology (Ahonen et al., 2018). Critically-ill patients may experience adverse events that may lead to mortality based on their genomic and genetic interactions from medications.

Social determinants of health impact access to health care and use of health information technology among the critically-ill patients. Nurses have training on the best way to integrate these technologies to enhance patient safety. They should focus on health promotion, and prevention of medication administration errors that impact patient safety.

Conclusion

Medication administration errors impact patient safety and quality of care for patients. The implication is that using health information technology like barcode scanning and smart devices as well as other interventions can prevent their occurrence. Nurses and other healthcare workers should understand that critically-ill patients require effective monitoring to reduce the occurrence of medication administration errors.

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 References

Ahonen, E. Q., Fujishiro, K., Cunningham, T., & Flynn, M. (2018). Work as an inclusive part of

population health inequities research and prevention. American journal of public health, 108(3), 306-311. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.304214.

Alotaibi, Y. K., & Federico, F. (2017). The impact of health information technology on patient

safety. Saudi medical journal, 38(12), 1173. doi: 10.15537/smj.2017.12.20631

Galt, K. A., Fuji, K. T., Kaufman, T. K., & Shah, S. R. (2019). Health information technology

use and patient safety: study of pharmacists in Nebraska. Pharmacy, 7(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy7010007

Jani, Y., Chumbley, G. M., Furniss, D., Blandford, A., & Franklin, B. (2020). The potential role

of smart infusion devices in preventing or contributing to medication administration errors: a descriptive study of two datasets. Journal of Patient Safety. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000751

Jeffries, M., Phipps, D. L., Howard, R. L., Avery, A. J., Rodgers, S., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2017).

Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation. BMC health services research, 17(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2131-5

Jheeta, S. & Franklin, B. D. (2017). The impact of a hospital electronic prescribing and

medication administration system on medication administration safety: an observational study. BMC Health Services Research, 17(547). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2462-2

Lapkin, S., Levett‐Jones, T., Chenoweth, L., & Johnson, M. (2017). The effectiveness of

interventions designed to reduce medication administration errors: a synthesis of findings from systematic reviews. Journal of nursing management, 24(7), 845-858. DOI:10.1111/jonm.12390

Sample Answer for Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550 Included After Question

Description:

PICOT (Population/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time to achieve the outcome) is a method that helps clarify the qualities needed to create a good question out of a practice issue or problem affecting a population of focus.

The purpose of this assignment is to complete your PICOT for your selected nursing practice problem. Refer to your “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Identification of Nursing Practice Problem” assignment from Topic 1 to complete this assignment. If your nursing practice problem or PICOT required revision, include those revisions in this assignment. The final PICOT you develop in this assignment will provide the framework for developing your evidence-based practice project proposal. Use the “PICOT-Final” template to complete this assignment.

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 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.

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.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550

Title:  Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper NUR 550

Proposed Evidence-Based Intervention

The recommended evidence-based strategy involves educating the general public and those who are at risk of COVID-19 about vaccination programs. The emphasis on the education will be on disseminating details on the vaccine’s efficacy and safety, the significance of immunization in halting the spread of COVID-19, and the vaccine’s accessibility and availability (Vizheh et al., 2020). The interventions will be delivered through different channels including social media, email, and text messaging. The proposed evidence-based practice adheres to health policies and goals that support healthcare equity for the population of focus. In other words, the intervention will place a priority on delivering education to communities that are disproportionately affected by COVID-19 to incorporate health policies and goals that support healthcare equity for the population of focus (Gray et al., 2020). This includes people with limited access to healthcare resources, people of color, and those from low-income areas.

The interventions will be delivered in a variety of languages, and efforts will be taken to guarantee that the material is sensitive to cultural differences and pertinent to the intended audience. The intervention will address vaccine hesitancy by addressing concerns and misconceptions about the vaccine. This will be achieved by providing accurate information and debunking myths about the vaccine. The goal of the intervention is to increase willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine by 50% within six months among the general population and individuals at risk of COVID-19, with a focus on promoting healthcare equity and addressing disparities in vaccine uptake (Žmitek et al., 2021).

Comparison of Intervention to Previous Practice or Research

 Education programs directed at those individuals vulnerable to COVID-19 have the potential to effectively reduce further spread of the virus, according to recent research. Previously, vaccination programs were generally limited in scope, catering only to particular groups such as healthcare workers and children. Yet with the growing threat of COVID-19, the importance of widespread inoculation has become evident. As a result, information campaigns are now viewed an important way to bridge the knowledge gap in these high-risk communities. When given access to quality education and instruction on vaccinations, individuals gain the opportunity to make an informed decision regarding their health and safety. Therefore, education programs can be seen as an effective defense against further contamination by COVID-19.