NR 500 Week 5 Graded Assignment: Area of Interest Presentation

NR 500 Week 5 Graded Assignment: Area of Interest Presentation

NR 500 Week 5 Graded Assignment: Area of Interest Presentation

Breast Cancer Screening

Patient safety and improved outcomes entail the major focus of nursing. Therefore, a MSN student or MSN prepared nurse should be able to engage in quality improvement projects and translate the existing evidence into practice to enhance better patient outcomes. As such the purpose of this presentation is to explore a practice problem of interest to nurse practitioners. As such, this presentation will address concepts such as evidence-based projects, conceptual model, area of interest, concern and recommendation for change, factors influencing change and NONPF competencies.

uEBP has widely been applied in field such as nursing.

uIt is important for MSN nurses to engage in EBP.

online nursing essays

Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on NR 500 Week 5 Graded Assignment: Area of Interest Presentation done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!

uIt helps improve patient outcomes.

uImproved institutional outcomes

uTo help reduce health care costs.

uEnhances practice for future nurses

uAdvances nursing science.

Even though evidence-based practice has been around for a long time, its use became more prominent in the year 2010 after the passing of the Affordable Care Act. Since then, evidence-based practice has widely been applied in various fields, nursing included. In nursing, it has mainly been applied to enhance patient outcomes and reduce costs (Melnyk & Fineout-Overhold, 2022). The implication is that the healthcare professionals should be EBP oriented, as such it is important for  MSN nurses to engage in EBP projects related to nursing practice and profession. One of the reasons is to improve patient outcomes. Applying EBP in patient care ensures that the patients are offered care following the most current guidelines hence improving outcomes. The other reasons including improving institutional outcomes, and to help reduce health care costs. It also helps in enhancing practice for future nurses and to advance nursing science. Additional detail about the importance of MSN nurses engaging in evidence based projects.

Conceptual models are important as they are used as frameworks for developing and implementing an evidence-based model. One of the applicable models is the PDSA model. PDSA is an abbreviation for Plan-DO-Study-Act. This model has been applied in various fields. It can be used to develop evidence based project. In the plan phase, one identifies a change aimed at improvement (Braithewaite, 2022). In addition, the do stage entails testing the change while the study stage examines how successful the change is. The act phase involves identification of the adaptation as the next steps to inform the new cycle.

As earlier indicated, the identified area of interest is high mortality rates resulting from breast cancer among African American women. Even though the prevalence rates of breast cancer among African American women and their white counterparts are comparable, the African Americans have poorer outcomes such as enhanced mortality rates. One of the major causes is lack of sufficient timely screening as most of the African Americans get diagnosed when the cancer is at advanced stage hence leading to minimal chances of survival (Foy et al.,2018). The implication is that there is a need to improve such outcomes by improving rates of breast cancer screen. Therefore, the recommended change is introduction of culturally tailored breast cancer education among African Americans to increase the frequency of breast cancer screening and go for a timeous screening for an earlier identification of breast cancer. This will ensure that treatments are timeously triggered for better outcomes. According to a recent study done by Brevik et al.(2020), culturally tailored education leads to increased rates of mammography attendance by 18%

Speaker notes should provide evidence support from the literature to show the recommended change is grounded in research and considered best practice

Area of Interest Presentation Purpose: The process for affecting positive change to improve practice outcomes can start with either the identification of an area of interest or the identification of a potential or existing practice problem. Selecting an area of interest helps to define a direction of further inquiry. Areas of interests can … categorized as concepts or topics. A concept is generally a broader interpretation; whereas a topic is a more specific or narrow focus of an area of interest. The purpose of this assessment is for students to identify and discuss an area of interest specific to their selected specialty track.

ORDER NOW FOR ORIGINAL PAPER NR 500 Week 5 Graded Assignment: Area of Interest Presentation

Area of Interest Presentation

Area of Interest Presentation Requirements: Criteria for Content Review literature or reflection on an experience that is … to common concepts and topics specific to your identified specialty track. Information on common topics for specific specialty tracks is located in Course Resources. Reflect on an area of passion that facilitated your specialty track selection. In a PowerPoint Presentation, address the following.

  • a. Introduction to presentation
  • b. Explain the importance of evidence-based projects related to nursing practice and profession.
  • c. Discuss a model for developing an evidence-based project.

i. Include illustration of model

  • d. Identify specialty track and reasons for selecting this area of study.
  • e. Introduce area of interest

i. Discuss what is known about the concept or topic.

ii. Provide common themes, ideas, or facts found in literature.

  • f. Provide a recommendation for positive change related to the area of interest.

i. Identify internal factors That have The potential To influence The change.

ii. Identify external factors That have The potential To influence The change.

  • g. Identify Two AACN Master’s Essentials That an evidence-based project or area of interest addresses.
  • h. Conclusion to presentation
  •  

i. Provide references

  • Conard, P. L., & Pape, T. (2014). Roles and responsibilities of the nursing scholar. Pediatric Nursing, 40(2), 87–90. Link
  • John Hopkins Medicine. (n.d.). John Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model. Retrieved from http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/jhn_ebp.html Link
  • Limoges, J., Acorn, S., & Osborne, M. (2015). The scholarship of application: Recognizing and promoting nurses’ contribution to knowledge development. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 46(2), 77– 82. doi:10.3928/00220124-20151217-02 Link
  • Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Sustaining evidence-based practice through organizational policies and an innovative model. American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. Link
  • Stevens, K. R. (2013). The impact of evidence-based practice in nursing and the next big ideas. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 18(2), 1. doi:10.3912/OJIN.Vol18No02Man04 Link

NR 500: Foundational Concepts and Applications

The Threaded Discussion Grading Grid and Rubric document can be found in Course Resources.

Participation Guidelines

Due Date: First initial posting to the required threaded discussion topic is due by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT. Peer and instructor responses are due by Sunday 11:59 pm MT. All posts for week 8 are due by the close of class on Wednesday 11:59 pm MT. Please note that the late assignment policy does not apply to the threaded discussions.

Total Points Possible: Varies with course, please see specific course syllabus. These guidelines are for a required threaded discussion worth 50 points. Please note that week 8 will be worth only 25 points.

Requirements:

Description of the Assignment

1. Initial posting: This is defined to be the initial post in which the student responds to the required threaded discussion topic. The first posting by a student within the required discussion area is considered to be the initial posting and will be evaluated using the rubric criteria. Scholarship in communication is expected. Required scholarly source(s) provide specific information that thoroughly address the required topic. For the initial posting, one scholarly source must be presented. The scholarly source must be an outside source. The student may use the required course textbook (s), assigned readings and lesson information in the initial post; however, these are not considered outside scholarly sources.

The initial posting must occur before Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT. Initial postings must be at a minimum of 300 words. References do not apply toward word count. ONLY in Week 8, the initial posting must be a minimum of 200 words with a scholarly reference. It remains due by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT

2. Peer responses: As part of the threaded discussion requirements, the student must provide a substantive response to a peer. Substantive responses pose new ideas, ask questions, and/or generally add to the discussion topic in a meaningful and constructive way.

The peer response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting and instructor response (see below). This peer response must occur before Sunday, 11:59 pm MT. This response does not require a scholarly reference unless information is paraphrased and/or direct quotes are used, then APA guidelines apply. Peer responses must be a minimum of 150 words. References do not apply toward word count.

3. Instructor response: The student must respond to an instructor’s follow-up questions. The instructor’s question may be directed to the student or may be a question directed to another student in the section. The response must be comprehensive and scholarly in nature. Instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words. References do not apply toward word count.

The response to the instructor must occur on a day different from the initial post and a day different from the peer response. Responses to the instructor must occur before Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.

4. For week 8 only: Students are expected to post a peer response or an instructor post but are not required to do both. These posts must be a minimum of 100 words. References do not apply toward word count. The peer or instructor response must be on a different day than the initial post and must occur before Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT due to the shorter week.

Posting Requirements:

  1. The initial posting must be provided before Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT.
  2. The initial posting must have at least one scholarly outside source that is cited within the posting and referenced. Required course textbooks, assigned readings and lesson information are not considered to be outside scholarly sources.
  3. Initial posting must be a minimum of 300 words; peer responses and instructor responses a minimum 150 words.
  4. The peer responses and instructor responses must be provided before Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.
  5. All postings are substantive and relate to the graded threaded discussion topic.
  6. Only one small quote (15 words or less) within the entire initial posting is accepted.
  7. Postings must occur on 3 separate days.
  8. For week 8 only: the required postings are amended due to the shorter week. Two posts are required. One initial post and either a peer response or an instructor response. Initial post must be a minimum of 200 words and the peer or instructor response must be a minimum of 100 words. Both posts are required to be on two separate days. All posts must be made by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT

Criteria for Content

  • Scholarliness: In this category, the student will conduct a search of the current databases and locate valid, relevant, and reliable information for the required topic. Each reference must be scholarly.
  • Application of Course Knowledge: In this category, the student demonstrates the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge, and information learned in the course lesson and outside readings. This information is then applied to a real-life professional situation as an example.
  • Interactive Dialogue: In this category, the minimum requirements are to provide an initial posting to the graded threaded discussion topic by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT of each week. In addition, one peer response and one instructor response are required. These postings must be completed by Sunday, 11:59 pm MT of each week. The initial posting, peer response, and instructor response must be on 3 separate days.
  • Grammar, Syntax, APA: Proper grammar, APA, and syntax is required for all posts. Students should follow the APA Manual 6th Edition. Additional APA information is available in Course Resources.
  • Participation Requirement: One initial posting, one peer response and one instructor response (for a total of 3 posts for the week) are required on 3 separate days.
  • Participation Deadline: The student must provide a substantive response to the graded threaded discussion topic. This must be posted by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT of each week. Peer and instructor responses must be posted by Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.
  • For week 8 only: the required postings are amended due to the shorter week. Two posts are required. One initial post and either a peer response or an instructor response. Initial post must be a minimum of 200 words and the peer or instructor response must be a minimum of 100 words. Both posts are required to be on two separate days. All posts must be made by Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT.

Criteria for Format and Special Instructions

  1. Instructor reserves the right to submit any threaded discussion posting to TurnItIn in order to verify the originality.
  2. When journals are used as the outside source of information, it is preferred that the journal be peer reviewed. The Chamberlain online librarian is very helpful in assisting you to find an article related to your topic. If you have questions concerning scholarly sources, please refer to the handout entitled “What is a scholarly source” located under “Course Resources” tab.
  3. Web sites vary in quality and scholarship. It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarly nature of the web site. If the instructor determines that the site failed to demonstrate scholarship, points maybe deducted. Students are cautioned to use care regarding .com sites. Some .com sites are excellent such as American Heart Association, but others are built by individuals and scholarliness is lacking. It is recommended that you check with your instructor before using a .com website as a reference.
  4. Only one small quote (15 words or less) within the entire initial posting is acceptable. It is expected that the student will paraphrase the information when presenting information from a scholarly source. The scholarly source(s) for the paraphrased information must be cited using APA format. Do not include a number of small quotes even if they are just a few words as your instructor considers a quote to be a quote no matter its limited size.

My interest is the prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer. I will discuss more on the actual screening and its effect on patients. According to the article, prostate cancer is almost exclusively a disease of middle-aged and elderly men with less than 1% of all prostate cancer diagnoses occurring in men less than 44 years of age. The median age of diagnosis is 67 years, with 60.6% of all diagnoses in men 65 years or older, and 25.3% of all diagnoses occurring in men 75 years or older (Leavitt & Konety, 2011). Interestingly, The effect PSA screening has played on mortality is more uncertain and has remained argumentative since PSA testing was first introduced. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are a real concern with prostate cancer and PSA screening. With a disease that becomes more prevalent and more aggressive with age, the use of PSA for prostate cancer screening in the elderly is an interesting and important question for aging men and for cost-conscious medical systems. The test does not diagnose prostate cancer, rather it is used to help predict the risk of having prostate cancer.

According to one contemporary randomized trial, DRE had a complication (pain or bleeding) rate of 0.3 per 10,000 screenings, PSA testing had a complication (dizziness, bruising or hematoma) rate of 26.2 per 10,000 screenings and medical complications from additional diagnostic procedure occurred at a rate of 68 per 10,000. A prostate biopsy is often recommended as the next diagnostic step for men with elevated PSA. Mild hematuria, rectal bleeding and hematospermia are some of the common complications of prostate biopsies. Vasovagal presyncopal or syncopal episodes occur in 1-3% of patients, urinary tract infections occur in 2-11% and sepsis occurs in 0.1-0.5% (Leavitt & Konety, 2011). False-negative results from PSA screening are directly related to the PSA cut-off point chosen to trigger further testing. Many studies suggest prostate cancer screening with PSA testing has been plagued with overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Overdiagnosis becomes most problematic when it leads to overtreatment, and this is no small issue in elderly men with low-risk prostate cancer. PSA screening has been controversial and lately there appears to be an increasing consensus against prostate cancer screening in men with limited life expectancies and in elderly men, especially those aged 75 years and older. This stems primarily from a lack of robust level I evidence showing prostate cancer screening in all elderly men improves prostate-cancer-specific survival or overall life expectancy (Leavitt & Konety, 2011).

Prostate cancer is a common cancer among elderly men, its natural progression is heterogeneous, and it continues to kill more men than any other noncutaneous cancer besides lung cancer. PSA is not an ideal screening marker, yet screening with PSA remains common in most elderly men despite mounting evidence of significant overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and a lack of convincing evidence of meaningful benefit from screening in this population. There should be a shared decision-making approach between patient and physician with a thorough discussion of the inherent risks, benefits and limitations of screening.

Leavitt, D. A., & Konety, B. R. (2011). Prostate-specific antigen screening in elderly men. Aging Health, 7(2), 219-229. http://dx.doi.org.chamberlainuniversity .idm.oc lc.org /10.2217 /ahe.10.84

Grading Rubric Guidelines

Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0

Scholarliness

Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.

  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions
  • Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion
  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
  • The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable
  • No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category  10 9 8 4 0

Application of Course Knowledge –

Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations

  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life.
  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content
  • Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson
  • Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.
  • Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored
  • No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category  5 4 3 2 0

Interactive Dialogue

Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.

(5 points possible per graded thread)

  • Exceeds minimum post requirements
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.
  • Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer
  • Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days
  • Replies to a question posed by a peer

Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.

  • Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.
  • The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline
  • Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty
  • Has only one post for the week
  • Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments
  • Does not post to the thread
  • No connections are made to the topic
  Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA

Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.

Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.

The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition

  • 2-3 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication.
  • 4-5 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is somewhat focused.
  • 6-7 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand.
  • 8-10 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand.
  • Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style does not facilitate communication.
  • The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
  0 points lost       -5 points lost

Total Participation Requirements

per discussion thread

The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day.       The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days

Early Participation Requirement

per discussion thread

The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.       The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

NOTE: To receive credit for a week’s discussion, students may begin posting no earlier than the Sunday immediately before each week opens. Unless otherwise specified, access to most weeks begins on Sunday at 12:01 a.m. MT, and that week’s assignments are due by the next Sunday by 11:59 p.m. MT. Week 8 opens at 12:01 a.m. MT Sunday and closes at 11:59 p.m. MT Wednesday. Any assignments and all discussion requirements must be completed by 11:59 p.m. MT Wednesday of the eighth week.

Don’t wait until the last minute

Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.