NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

Sample Answer for NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison Included After Question

Description:

The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a comparison on different research designs to better understand their designs and application. Understanding the different types of research design is important so that nurses can effectively apply evidence-based research into practice to address issues and offer better patient care.
You will utilize your approved nursing practice problem to complete the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments for this course and NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.
Review feedback from your instructor on your “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Identification of Nursing Practice Problem,” submitted in Topic 1. If your original proposed nursing problem was outside the scope of nursing practice or not conducive to an evidence-based practice project proposal, work with your instructor to identify a new topic prior to beginning this assignment. If your proposed topic requires revision, complete this prior to beginning this assignment.
Conduct a literature search on your approved nursing practice problem. Find two translational research articles, one quantitative article, and one qualitative article. Using the “Translational Research Graphic Organizer,” present your proposed topic and, in the tables provided, compare one translational study to the quantitative study, and one translational study to the qualitative study.
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 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: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

Title: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

State the nursing practice problem for your evidence-based practice project. If your nursing problem has not yet been approved, make any required changes or revisions to your nursing practice problem prior to starting the assignment. Using your proposed topic, conduct a literature search and complete the tables below.

Nursing Practice Problem: Catheter-acquired urinary tract infections

Comparison 1: Translational Research vs. Qualitative Research

Criteria	Peer-Reviewed Translational Article and Permalink/Working Link:Kline, S. E., Neaton, J. D., Lynfield, R., Ferrieri, P., Kulasingam, S., Dittes, K., … & Johnson, J. R. (2018). Randomized controlled trial of a self-administered five-day antiseptic bundle versus usual disinfectant soap showers for preoperative eradication of Staphylococcus aureus colonization. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 39(9), 1049-1057. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2018.151 Translational Research Type: T2	Peer-Reviewed Traditional Article and Permalink/Working Link:Goldman, J., Rotteau, L., Shojania, K. G., Baker, G. R., Rowland, P., Christianson, M. K., … & Coffey, M. (2021). Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units. Implementation Science Communications, 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00204-y Traditional Qualitative Research Type: Interpretivist qualitative research	Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology	This was a single-center randomized controlled trial carried out in ambulatory orthopedic, urologic, general surgery, cardiovascular, colorectal, and neurologic clinics in the USA. 427 participants took part, with some randomized into the decolonization bundle group while the rest were in the control group	This was a qualitative interpretive research where a total of seventy-four participants were interviewed regarding their belief in the central-line bundle implementation as a quality improvement initiative.	While the translational article used a randomized controlled trial as the methodology, the qualitative research used interviews.
Goals	To determine the effectiveness of eradicating staphylococcus aureus carriage of a five-day preoperative bundle as compared to disinfectant soaps.	The goal of the research was to examine unit-based socio-cultural factors which impact bundle practice and measurement as well as how they are recognized and attended to by the safety leaders using bundle implementation efforts.	They both focused on bundle implementation.
Data Collection	Data was collected through various means such as screening, recording in the diary, and medical review.	Data were mainly collected through observation and interview	There was an aspect of documentation in data collection in both research articles.

NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

Description:

The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a comparison on different research designs to better understand their designs and application. Understanding the different types of research design is important so that nurses can effectively apply evidence-based research into practice to address issues and offer better patient care.

You will utilize your approved nursing practice problem to complete the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments for this course and NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Review feedback from your instructor on your “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Identification of Nursing Practice Problem,” submitted in Topic 1. If your original proposed nursing problem was outside the scope of nursing practice or not conducive to an evidence-based practice project proposal, work with your instructor to identify a new topic prior to beginning this assignment. If your proposed topic requires revision, complete this prior to beginning this assignment.

Conduct a literature search on your approved nursing practice problem. Find two translational research articles, one quantitative article, and one qualitative article. Using the “Translational Research Graphic Organizer,” present your proposed topic and, in the tables provided, compare one translational study to the quantitative study, and one translational study to the qualitative study.

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 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.

Topic 2 DQ 1

Description:

Explain the value of biostatistics in population health research. Describe the role of epidemiology in researching and addressing population health challenges. How are epidemiology and biostatistics significant to your evidence-based practice proposal?

A definition of biostatistics is “The application of statistical concepts to biology and medicine in order to summarize the characteristics of samples and to test predictions about the populations from which the samples were taken” (Minkoff, 2022).  A patient population may be too large to study everyone, those with chronic pain, for example, therefore biostatics is a way to measure a sample of that patient population. The value of biostatistics in population health research is that biostatistics data is used to identify population health issues or concerns and to monitor the progress of interventions (Nash, Skoufalos, Fabius, & Oglesby, 2021, p. 25).

Epidemiology in research examines or looks at a group, not an individual. It also has the goal of improving health among the patient population. In the study of epidemiology, the disease is studied to determine the burden, the cause, the course, or progression, identify appropriate interventions to improve health outcomes, and inform (Nash, Skoufalos, Fabius, & Oglesby, 2021, p. 28).

Epidemiology and biostatistics are significant to my evidence-based practice proposal for two reasons. One, after completing this discussion, I see now that I must better define my population and intervention. My evidence-based practice proposal is still in the “revision” stage. Secondly, both are needed to determine the best evidence to make the most informed decisions.

References

Minkoff, E. C. (2022). Biostatistics. Magill’s Medical Guide (Online Edition).

Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021). Population Health (Third ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Topic 2 DQ 2

Description:

Consider ecological and global issues, social determinants of health, principles of genetics, and genomics. Explain how translational research can be applied in these areas to address the burden of global disease.

Topic 2 Participation

Description:

Topic 2: Epidemiology, Biostatistics, Genetics, and Genomics

Description

Objectives:

1. Describe the role of epidemiology in researching population health challenges.
   2. Describe the role of epidemiology in addressing population health challenges.
   3. Explain the value of biostatistics in population health research.
   4. Discuss the application of translational research to global issues.
   Study Materials

Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

Description:

Read Chapter 19 in Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession.

Population Health: Creating a Culture of Wellness

Description:

Read Chapters 2 and 3 in Population Health: Creating a Culture of Wellness.

Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare

Description:

Read Chapters 2 and 3 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare.

Biostatistics

Description:

Read “Biostatistics,” by Minkoff, from Magill’s Medical Guide (2018).

Population Health

Description:

Read “Population Health” by Bibb, from Encyclopedia of Nursing Research (2017).

A Research Utilisation Framework for Informing Global Health and Development Policies and Programmes
Description:

Read “A Research Utilisation Framework for Informing Global Health and Development Policies and Programmes,” by Christine et al., from Health Research Policy and Systems (2018).

Translational Research

Description:

Read “Translational Research” by White, from Encyclopedia of Nursing Research (2017).

Overview and Summary: Translational Research: From Knowledge to Practice

Description:

Read “Overview and Summary: Translational Research: From Knowledge to Practice,” by Naylor, from Online Journal of Issues in Nursing (2018).

Genomics

Description:
Tasks

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NUR-550 NUR-550-O503 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Research Design Comparison 100.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Good (92.00%) Excellent (100.00%)
Content 100.0%
Nursing Practice Problem (Revision) 10.0% The nursing practice problem was not included, or the required revisions were not made. The changes failed to meet the criteria for a relevant nursing practice problem for an evidence-based practice project proposal. Additional revisions are still required for approval. Revisions were made accordingly to improve the proposed nursing practice problem, but some aspects are inaccurate or unclear. Additional revisions are still required for approval. NA The nursing practice problem is clearly presented and approved. No revision was required, or all necessary revisions are were made.

Translational and Traditional Articles 15.0% More than two articles selected do not meet the assignment criteria. At least one article is omitted. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria. It is unclear how one or two of the articles support the proposed nursing practice problem. One article does not meet the assignment criteria. Overall, the articles generally support the proposed nursing practice problem. The proposed problem would be better supported with the selection of one or two different articles. The articles meet the assignment criteria and provide adequate support for the proposed nursing practice problem. A quantitative article and a qualitative article were each compared to a translational research article. The articles are peer-reviewed, published within the last five years, and pertain to the nursing practice problem. The assignment criteria are fully met.

Comparison of Methodology Between Translational and Traditional Research 15.0% The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is omitted. The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies. A summary comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear. The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity. The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is thorough and accurate. A clear understanding of translational and traditional methodologies is demonstrated.

Comparison of Goals Between Translational and Traditional Research 15.0% The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is omitted. The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies. A summary comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear. A comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity. The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is thorough and accurate. An understanding of goals between traditional and translational research is evident.

Comparison of Data Collection Between Translational and Traditional Research 15.0% The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is omitted. The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies. A summary comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear. The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity. The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is thorough and accurate. An understanding of goals between traditional and translational research is evident.

Observations (Similarities and Differences) 20.0% The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are not discussed. The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are only partially discussed. The narrative is vague and contains inaccuracies. The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are summarized. More information is needed. There are minor inaccuracies. The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are detailed and informative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed 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. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

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.

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

Title: NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison

The selected nursing problem of focus in my project is falls among hospitalized patients aged 65 years and above. Elderly patients have the highest fall rates as compared to other patient populations. Statistics show that at least 300000 older people suffer from hip fractures annually in the USA. More than 95% of these fractures are attributable to falling sideways. Besides fractures, falls result in premature mortalities, prolonged hospitalizations, poor quality of life, and increased care costs. Health technologies have proven effective in detecting, reducing, and preventing patient falls. For example, the use of automated fall detection systems and sensors have been shown to enhance early detection, prevention, and minimization of falls among hospitalized patients. Therefore, my project examines the use of the technology to improve fall rates among hospitalized elderly patients aged 65 years and above.

Comparison 1: Translational Research vs. Qualitative Research

Criteria	Peer-Reviewed Translational Article and Permalink/Working Link:Rahme, M., Folkeard, P., & Scollie, S. (2021). Evaluating the accuracy of step tracking and fall detection in the Starkey Livio artificial intelligence hearing aids: A pilot study. American Journal of Audiology, 30(1), 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJA-20-00105Translational Research Type: T2	Peer-Reviewed Traditional Article and Permalink/Working Link:Coahran, M., Hillier, L. M., Bussel, L. V., Black, E., Churchyard, R., Gutmanis, I., Ioannou, Y., Michael, K., Ross, T., & Mihailidis, A. (2018). Automated fall detection technology in inpatient geriatric psychiatry: Nurses’ perceptions and lessons learned. Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 37(3), 245. 10.1017/S0714980818000181Traditional Qualitative Research Type: Qualitative study	Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology	This study was pilot research to examine the effectiveness of an automated fall detection system in fall detection and detecting fall maneuvers. The adopted technology was Starkey Livio Artificial Intelligence hearing aids and tracking step count. The participants wore the system, a Sportline pedometer, and Fitbit Charge 3 concurrently during treadmill and real-world walking conditions. Fall detection and alert were assessed by falling maneuvers of the activities of daily living.	This study was a qualitative study that examined the perceptions of nurses with the HELPER system and lessoned learned from its ability to prevent and reduce patient falls. The study was conducted following a pilot test where nurses were interviewed about their perceptions of the HELPER technology. The nurses were from two geriatric units in Ontario, Canada. Data was analyzed using qualitative naturalistic inquiry approach.	The studies differ on their designs. The study by Rahme et al. (2021) adopted quantitative methods while that by Coahran et al. (2018) adopted qualitative methods. They also differ based on the technologies that were examined for effectiveness in fall prevention and detection. Coahran et al. (2018) utilized qualitative methods of data collection and analysis while Rahme et al. (2021) used quantitative approaches to data collection and analysis. They both focused on the effectiveness of automated technologies in fall detection and prevention.
Goals	The primary aim of this research was to examine the effectiveness and efficacy of Starkey Livio Artificial Intelligence hearing aids in tracking step count. The secondary aim was to investigate the accuracy of the fall detection and alert system of Livio hearing aids in detecting fall maneuvers.	The goal of this study was to obtain the perceptions of nurses with their use of the HELPER system. The study also aimed to identify lessons learned from the technology use in preventing falls in two geriatric units caring patients aged between 60 and 90 years.	The two studies are similar in that they examined the effectiveness of health technologies in fall detection, notification, and prevention. They differ based on the technologies that were being investigated for their effectiveness.
Data Collection	Data on patient’s real-world health condition was obtained through a 5-day period. Step count was done for six different treadmill speeds. The generated fall detection and alerts were analyzed to determine their effectiveness in reducing fall risks among the patients.	Data for this research was collected through interviews conducted with nurses working in the unit. The interviews were conducted over two days by a trained research associate who did not participate in the pilot implementation. The interviews were recorded digitally and transcribed.	The data collection approaches in the studies differ. Coahran et al. (2018) utilized interviews that were digitally recorded and transcribed. Rahme et al. (2021) utilized quantitative methods of data collection based on the observed and physiological changes with activity.

Comparison 2: Translational Research vs. Quantitative Research

Criteria	Peer-Reviewed Translational Article and Permalink/Working Link:Lumetzberger, J., Münzer, T., & Kampel, M. (2021). Non-obtrusive 3d body tracking for automated mobility assessment in independently living older persons: Results of a pilot trial. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology, 7(26), e4–e4. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.4-3-2021.168863Translational Research Type: T2	Peer-Reviewed Traditional Article and Permalink/Working Link:Nemeth, B., van der Kaaij, M., Nelissen, R., van Wijnen, J.-K., Drost, K., & Blauw, G. J. (2022). Prevention of hip fractures in older adults residing in long-term care facilities with a hip airbag: A retrospective pilot study. BMC Geriatrics, 22(1), 547. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-03221-1Traditional Quantitative Research Type: Retrospective quantitative study	Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology	The study was a pilot investigation of the effectiveness of real time data and mobility assessments in fall detection and prevention. The intervention entailed automatic tracking and detection of movements for the study participants using Orbbec Astra 3d camera. A field trial for the intervention was done for a 10-month period in the private homes of 20 generally healthy older adults. 20 study participants were enrolled and assessed following their use of automated trackers for parameters such as movement patterns, size, and height. Data was expressed as standard deviation and means. Linear regression analysis was done to determine the association of manual physical therapy with machine-based gait data.	This study was a retrospective pilot study that involved 969 participants residing in 11 long-term facilities for the older patients. The researchers utilized intervention that entails the application of 45 WOLK-hip airbags for fall and fracture detection and prevention. The inclusion criteria included physically active participants with pelvic circumference of 90-125 cm. The exclusion criteria included participants who continuously removed hip airbag for themselves and those depending on wheelchair for mobility.	The two studies focused on the effect of technology use in improving gait, physical activity, and falls among the elderly. They differed based on the study designs. While the study by Nemeth et al., (2022) was a retrospective quantitative research, the one by Lumetzberger et al., (2021) was a pilot study on the use of 3D technology in patient monitoring and assessment of fall risk. The two studies support that health technologies are feasible for use in fall detection and prevention.
Goals	The goal of this study was to assess mobility of the older persons using real time data and comparing it with the mobility assessment of physiotherapists.	The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of introducing WOLK hip airbag on the incidence of hip fractures. The secondary aim was to evaluate the occurrences of falls and pelvic fractures among the participants.	The two studies differ based on their goals. The study by Lumetzberger et al., (2021) examined the effectiveness of using real-time data on gait studies and fall rates while Nemeth et al., (2022) investigated the effect of airbags on fall rates and fractures among those at risk.
Data Collection	A trained physical therapist conducted gait study tests to each of the study subjects. They collected data on the participants’ ability to perform three repetitive tasks to assess for possible mobility changes. At the same time, an automated tracker measured test duration and gait velocity for use in comparing both data.	Data on hip, falls, and pelvic fractures were collected from electronic incidence reports for the participants. The demographic data were extracted electronically from patient records and summarized for median of the study period.	The studies differ on the approaches to data collection. The study by Nemeth et al., (2022) utilized electronic data of the participants to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. On the other hand, Lumetzberger et al., (2021) focused mainly on the physiological changes that occurred with the delivery of the intervention to the participants. Both approaches to data collection were quantitative.

Conclusion

In summary, the reviewed studies show that automated technologies and systems are effective in fall detection, notification, and prevention. They also reduce the risk and rate of injuries due to falls, including fractures. Evidence obtained from translational and traditional sources of evidence support technology use in fall prevention. Therefore, it should be considered for use in healthcare and nursing practice.

NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Research Design Comparison References

Coahran, M., Hillier, L. M., Bussel, L. V., Black, E., Churchyard, R., Gutmanis, I., Ioannou, Y., Michael, K., Ross, T., & Mihailidis, A. (2018). Automated fall detection technology in inpatient geriatric psychiatry: Nurses’ perceptions and lessons learned. Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 37(3), 245. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980818000181

Lumetzberger, J., Münzer, T., & Kampel, M. (2021). Non-obtrusive 3d body tracking for automated mobility assessment in independently living older persons: Results of a pilot trial. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology, 7(26), e4–e4. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.4-3-2021.168863

Nemeth, B., van der Kaaij, M., Nelissen, R., van Wijnen, J.-K., Drost, K., & Blauw, G. J. (2022). Prevention of hip fractures in older adults residing in long-term care facilities with a hip airbag: A retrospective pilot study. BMC Geriatrics, 22(1), 547. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-03221-1

Rahme, M., Folkeard, P., & Scollie, S. (2021). Evaluating the accuracy of step tracking and fall detection in the Starkey Livio artificial intelligence hearing aids: A pilot study. American Journal of Audiology, 30(1), 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJA-20-00105