NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

Sample Answer for NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission Included After Question

Assessment Description

Submit your literature review from NUR-550 for your NUR-590 instructor to review. If your NUR-550 instructor indicated areas for revision be sure to incorporate these improvements prior to submitting your paper for this assignment.

You will use the revised literature review for your final written paper in Topic, 8 detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines 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.

Resources

Collapse All

Implementation Science and Nursing Leadership: Improving the Adoption and Sustainability of Evidence-Based Practice

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

Read “Implementation Science and Nursing Leadership: Improving the Adoption and Sustainability of Evidence-Based Practice,” by Ne

… Read More

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00005110-202105000-00003&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

Evidence Based Medicine Toolkit

Explore the “Evidence Based Medicine Toolkit,” by Buckingham, Fisher, and Saunders (2012), located on the University of Alberta w

… Read More

http://www.ebm.med.ualberta.ca/

Striving for Evidence-Based Practice Innovations Through a Hybrid Model Journal Club: A Pilot Study

Read “Striving for Evidence-Based Practice Innovations Through a Hybrid Model Journal Club: A Pilot Study,” by Wilson, Ice, Nakas

… Read More

http://www.sciencedirect.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0260691715000817

A Leader’s Guide to Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Lead the Way to Healthcare Quality and Safety

Read “A Leader’s Guide to Implementing Evidence-Based Practice: Lead the Way to Healthcare Quality and Safety,” by Tucker and Mel

… Read More

https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A616904277/AONE?u=canyonuniv&sid=AONE&xid=f2d66c7c

Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice

Read Chapters 1 and 2 in Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice.

View Resource

Evaluation of a Nurse Practitioner-Led Project to Improve Communication and Collaboration in the Acute Care Setting

Read “Evaluation of a Nurse Practitioner-Led Project to Improve Communication and Collaboration in the Acute Care Setting,” by Au

… Read More

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&D=ovft&AN=01741002-900000000-99523&PDF=y

Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare : A Guide to Best Practice

Read Chapters 1-3 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice.

View Resource

Centre for Evidence Based Medicine: About Us

Read “About Us” page of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) website.

http://www.cebm.net/about

Evidence-Based Practice Tutorial

Read the Evidence-Based Practice tutorial, located on the Duke University website.

http://guides.mclibrary.duke.edu/c.php?g=158201&p=1036002

Evidence Based Medicine

Explore the Evidence Based Medicine page of the University of Illinois Library of the Health Sciences website. Use this website as a reso

… Read More

http://researchguides.uic.edu/ebm

Centre for Evidence Based Medicine: Resources

Explore the Resources page of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) website.

http://www.cebm.net/cate

NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission – Rubric

Collapse All

NUR-550 Resubmission of Literature Review

50 points

Criteria Description

NUR-550 Resubmission of Literature Review

5. 5: Excellent

50 points

The Literature Review paper from NUR-550 is submitted.

4. 4: Good

46 points

NA

3. 3: Satisfactory

44 points

NA

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

40 points

NA

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The Literature Review paper from NUR-550 is not submitted.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment:  NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

Title: NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

Benchmark – Part B: Literature Review

Does provision of evidence-based education on cervical cancer screening increase the screening uptake within three months among women age between 20 and 35 years. Cervical cancer is a major public health concern that contributes about 12.9% of all cancer new cases. Furthermore, the disease contributes to about 11.84% of cases of all cancer deaths (Ngune, Kalembo, Loessl & Kivuti-Bitok, 2020). Furthermore, about nine women aged between 20 and 30 years die of cervical cancer every day (Ngune, Kalembo, Loessl & Kivuti-Bitok, 2020). The statistics show that cervical cancer is a major health threat especially among women aged between 20 and 30 years. The disease is caused by HPV infections. Most of the infections are transitory while others may persist especially when the patient has a reduced immune system due to other diseases such as HIV and diabetes.

Women in their twenties are sexually active and this means that they have a high risk of getting HPV infections and cervical cancer. Having more than one sexual partners could also increase the risk of acquiring one of the many strains of HPV. Studies indicate that the incidences of cervical cancer among the population group almost doubled between 2000 and 2009. Furthermore, despite the surge in the incidences of cervical cancer among the populations; the uptake rates for the screening services are significantly low. Lack of cervical cancer screening among the populations means that many cases are diagnosed at advanced stages and so leading to poor prognosis. The survival rates for patients with cervical cancer are low because of the late diagnosis.

Method

The study involves a review of the relevant literature published on the topic. Credible and reliable sources were used in the study. The key search words used in identifying appropriate articles for the study included, ‘‘cervical cancer among women aged between 20nd 30 years,’’ ‘‘cervical cancer uptake among young women’’ and ‘‘prevalence and burden of cervical cancer among young women.’’ Articles published not later than 5 years ago were used to provide updated information on the health issue. A total of 20 articles were identified based on the above key search phrases. The articles were further analyzed for credibility. The first criteria for determining the reliability of the source was determining whether it is peer-reviewed or not. Peer-reviewed studies were used. Furthermore, the methods employed in the study were determined. The credibility of the findings published in a study depends on the method employed in the research process. As a result, the articles with properly outlined methods and adequate sample populations were selected. The goal of criticizing the articles is to ensure that factual and valid evidence is provided to support the findings in this study.

Literature Synthesis

Heena et al. (2019) explored the knowledge, attitude, and practices towards cervical cancer screening among female healthcare practitioners. The study involved a cross-sectional approach where a total of 420 participants were recruited, but, only 395 participants responded to the surveys. The stratified random sampling was used with the participants including a physician, nurses, and healthcare workers. The study reported that 93% of the participants lacked knowledge on the cervical cancer symptoms, preventive measures, and the behaviours that could dispose of one to the disease. The study provides relevant findings to the fact that low uptake for cervical cancer screening among young women is attributed to a lack of knowledge as outlined in the PICOT. The fact that many healthcare professionals are not aware of the cervical cancer signs and symptoms, as well as the preventive measures, shows that the patients cannot also access such vital information. The apathy in information access concerning cervical cancer management and prevention presents a serious threat to public health.

Furthermore, Chang et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional study to explore the factors that affected cervical cancer screening choices among the populations. The study hypothesized that cervical cancer screening uptake among young Korean women was low. The study recruited a total of 3734 participants to explore factors that influenced their willingness to go for the cancer screening as outlined in the current study’s PICOT. The study reported that age, education, job status, and household income influenced the willingness of women to go for cervical cancer tests. The household income was only relevant among the women aged between 30 and 39 years. On the other hand, women aged between 15 and 29 years were mainly influenced by the education factor. The study identified multifactorial issues that affect the cervical cancer screening choices among women thus building on the scope of the current study. The goal of the current study is to implement education provision to the population to help reduce the burden of cervical cancer. Therefore, the findings in the study by Chang et al. (2017) prove the relevance of the intervention defined in the PICOT.

Also, Binka et al. (2019) analyzed the barriers to cervical cancer treatment and screening among rural women in Ghana. The study involved in-depth interviews conducted among 25 women. The findings show that psychological convictions, low level of knowledge on cervical cancer screening and treatment, and perceived lack of privacy influenced the low uptake in cervical cancer screening. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the role of lack of education in the constrained cervical cancer screening. The study contributes significantly to the understanding of the problem among the populations outlined in the PICOT. There is a significant dearth of information and knowledge about cervical cancer screening, treatment, and prevention measures among the populations.

Tapera et al. (2019) corroborates the findings in the other studies through the study conducted to explore the attitudes of women aged below 25 years towards cervical cancer. The study involved a sequential exploratory mixed approach. The findings showed that the levels of knowledge vary. The study reports that only 23% of the participants knew the causes of cervical cancer. On the other hand, 80% were aware of the treatment for cervical cancer.

Comparison

The studies reviewed reveal the need to increase cervical cancer screening awareness and education among the populations. The studies recruited a cross-sectional method in exploring the health issue; the method provides wide and reliable data to support the conclusions arrived. The study by Binka et al. (2019) recruited 25 members; however, the data collection approach was intensive considering that an in-depth interview was conducted. The findings from the study supplement the reports were given by Chang et al. (2017) and Heena, et al (2019) who employed survey methods in data collection.

The report given by the studies are consistent and support the PICOT for the current study. The studies explored the health issue among different target populations. Heena, et al (2019) explored the knowledge among the women healthcare workers and this provides the background under which the analysis of the issue should start. Healthcare workers play important role in educating the public on proper health intervention and primary prevention approaches. Lack of such knowledge among the healthcare providers means that the population has no chance of getting such education unless other avenues for learning are developed. The other studies were conducted national wide among the general population and reports are consistent with what would be expected based on the report by Heena, et al (2019).

However, the report provided by Heena et al. (2019) could be exaggerated and contradicts the findings by Tapera et al. (2019). While there is a gap in the knowledge on cervical cancer prevention and treatment among women, it sounds controversial that 93% of the women healthcare workers are not aware of the cause, signs and symptoms, and the treatment for cervical cancer.

Areas of Further Study

The findings provide sufficient data on the role of education in addressing cervical cancer. On the other hand, there is a need to explore further the role of socio-cultural factors and their implications on the effectiveness of the education programs to combat the disease. The findings from the previous studies show that providing education to the public could play an important role in reducing the burden of cervical cancer. However, socio-cultural factors could have confounding effects and that is it is important to explore the topic deeper and develop appropriate interventions. The level of knowledge also varies with the variations in the population’s level of education and economic status.

NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission References

Binka, C., Nyarko, S. H., Awusabo-Asare, K., & Doku, D. T. (2019). Barriers to the uptake of cervical cancer screening and treatment among rural women in Ghana. BioMed research international, 2019.

Chang, H. K., Myong, J. P., Byun, S. W., Lee, S. J., Lee, Y. S., Lee, H. N., … & Park, T. C. (2017). Factors associated with participation in cervical cancer screening among young Koreans: a nationwide cross-sectional study. BMJ Open, 7(4).

Heena, H., Durrani, S., AlFayyad, I., Riaz, M., Tabasim, R., Parvez, G., & Abu-Shaheen, A. (2019). Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards cervical cancer and screening amongst female healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional study. Journal of oncology, 2019.

Ngune, I., Kalembo, F., Loessl, B., & Kivuti-Bitok, L. W. (2020). Biopsychosocial risk factors and knowledge of cervical cancer among young women: A case study from Kenya to inform HPV prevention in Sub-Saharan Africa. PLOS ONE, 15(8), e0237745.

Tapera, O., Dreyer, G., Kadzatsa, W., Nyakabau, A. M., Stray-Pedersen, B., & SJH, H. (2019). Cervical cancer knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices of women aged at least 25 years in Harare, Zimbabwe. BMC Women’s Health, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0790-6

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.

Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.

One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.

I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.

Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.

In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.

Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).

Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.

APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).

Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.

I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.

As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an underastanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.

It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:

Lopes Write Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to Lopes Write, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.

Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.

Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?

Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.

Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.

Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.

If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.

I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.

As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.

Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:

Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.

Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Important information for writing discussion questions and participation

Welcome to class

Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to

I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you.

Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted.

If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations.

Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements.

Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course.

Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week.

I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!

Hi Class,

Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts.

Contact me if you have any questions.

Important information on Writing a Discussion Question

• Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references)
• There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article.
• Include in-text citations in your response
• Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information
• Follow APA-7th edition
• Points will be deducted if the above is not followed

Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor

• A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week.
• Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article
• Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references)
• Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count.
• Follow APA 7th edition
• Points will be deducted if the above is not followed

• Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points.
• Here are some helpful links
• Student paper example
• Citing Sources
• The Writing Center is a great resource

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment:  NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

Title: NUR-550 Literature Review – Resubmission

For this research question, the PICOT statement is as follows: Does a pressure preventative bundle discharge plan, as compared to the current planning, decrease readmission due to pressure injuries within 30 days after discharge for patients with a Braden Scale score of 16 or less who are being discharged to facilities in the community? 

Patients with a Braden Scale score of 16 or below who are going to be released to facilities in the community are the focus of this PICOT statement’s attention as the population of emphasis. The high risk of readmission owing to pressure injuries within 30 days after release for this cohort is the issue that is being looked at right now. A pressure preventive bundle discharge strategy is being considered as an option for the intervention at this time. The existing planning serves as the benchmark for this comparison. The rate of readmission owing to pressure injuries within the first thirty days after discharge is the outcome that is being examined at this time. 

Patients who have a score of 16 or below on the Braden Scale are at an increased risk of suffering from pressure injuries, which is the motivation for this study topic. Pressure injuries can result in a wide range of consequences, one of which is infection; nevertheless, they are frequently avoidable with the help of careful discharge planning. 

An intervention that is supported by evidence and has been proven to be successful in reducing pressure injuries is referred to as the pressure preventive bundle discharge plan. Education on the avoidance of pressure injuries, instructions on wound care, and the utilization of pressure-relieving equipment are all included in the pressure preventive bundle discharge plan. The plan also contains a number of other components. 

The pressure preventive bundle discharge plan is an intervention that is not only doable but also adaptable enough to be used in a range of different environments. Implementation of the pressure prevention bundle discharge plan by a range of healthcare professionals is one of the interventions that is considered to be practical. 

The pressure prevention bundle discharge plan has the ability to reduce the number of patients who are readmitted within the first 30 days after being discharged from the hospital as a result of pressure injuries. 

An intervention that is supported by evidence and has been proven to be successful in reducing pressure injuries is referred to as the pressure preventive bundle discharge plan. The pressure preventive bundle discharge plan is another intervention that has the potential to be successful and may be used in a variety of different contexts. 

The pressure preventive bundle discharge plan is an appropriate intervention for patients who are going to be released to facilities in the community and have a Braden Scale score of 16 or below. The pressure prevention bundle discharge plan has the ability to reduce the number of patients who are readmitted within the first 30 days after being discharged from the hospital as a result of pressure injuries. The evidence-based pressure preventive bundle discharge plan is an intervention that may be implemented by a wide variety of healthcare professionals in a practical manner.