NURS 8114 Module 3 Exploring EBP Quality Improvement Essay
NURS 8114 Module 3 Exploring EBP Quality Improvement Essay
NURS 8114 Module 3 Exploring EBP Quality Improvement Essay
For this Assignment you will explore key components of a quality improvement initiative, which will be the focus of the DNP Project required for your doctoral program. This Assignment is designed to help you begin investigating potential practice sites for your project, possible practice problems to address based on your interests and the needs of specific sites, and how to identify and approach stakeholders with whom to work and align in a health care setting.
Photo Credit: [Steve Hix/Fuse]/[None]/Getty Images
You will begin the Assignment this week and submit it by Day 7 of Week 6. The topic focus on the science of translation and Learning Resources in Weeks 5 and 6 will further support development of this Assignment.
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on NURS 8114 Module 3 Exploring EBP Quality Improvement Essay done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Important Note: Your activities in this Module 3 Assignment are exploratory and hypothetical only. You should not begin any formal contact with regard to your DNP Project. Consult the DNP Project Process Guide in the Learning Resources for information, including on the project implementation schedule.
To prepare:
- Review the readings and media in the Week 4 Learning Resources. Pay particular attention to how Quality Improvement (QI) is defined in the DNP Glossary and Chapter 8 of the White, Dudley-Brown, and Terhaar text.
- Identify three potential sites within your community for a quality improvement project. These might be a health care organization in which you practice and two other locations. For example, you might practice in a large organization and consider a small clinic and a skilled care facility as other potential settings for your project.
- Based on your practice experience, consider potential practice problems as the focus of an EBP Quality Improvement initiative. Investigate the three practice sites you have identified for specific needs, including by making informal contact with staff members you know. (Remember the importance of confidentiality in any such discussions.)
- Note: You may continue to address the same practice issue that was the focus of your Discussions in Weeks 2 and 3. You may also draw on the Week 4 blog to consider a broad focus on EBP and then drill down on specific practice problems to address through application of EBP. The PET model described in the video, An Evidence-Based Practice Model, also provides examples for identifying practice issues to address.
- Research the literature for scholarly articles to support developing a quality improvement project that applies evidence-based practice to address specific practice problems. Aim to identify at least three scholarly articles to support this Assignment.
- Based on the practice problems you are identifying, investigate your potential practice sites for key stakeholders that would be involved in a quality improvement initiative. Using website and other information available to you for each site, explore for:
- A department that leads quality improvement or, if one does not exist, who within the organization would approve a quality improvement initiative;
- Stakeholder titles, from the highest level of required approval to health care associates who would implement QI changes in the practice of patient care.
- From your research into potential sites and practice problems, choose one practice problem and one site as your focus.Based on your target practice problem and selected site, identify an implementation framework and consider the steps or process required for an EBP QI project that would follow this framework/model. Note: Week 5 Learning Resources and Discussion will provide strategic support.
- Outline how you would present the elements of your proposed QI project to stakeholders to gain their approval. Reminder: Your purpose is to prepare for a future presentation to stakeholders. Do not contact stakeholders for this Assignment.
- Use the College of Nursing PowerPoint Template, provided in the Learning Resources, for developing a presentation to stakeholders. The template offers options in a cover slide and format options for other slides, to enable you to customize your presentation. Also refer to the handout, Preparing for an EBP QI Presentation to Stakeholders at a Practice Site, in the Learning Resources for guidance.
The Assignment
Part 1: Key Project Elements
In a paper of 6–8 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following:
- Describe the three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project. For each health care setting, identify the following defining features: patient population, mission, public or private entity, single institution or member of a corporation, and others you identify as significant.
- Compare the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples.
- Explain the practice problems that you explored based on your interests and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated.
- Explain why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples.
- For each health care setting, describe the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results.
- Compare similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings.
- Identify the one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem you have selected as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders, and explain your choices.
Part 2: Implementation Science Presentation
Develop a PowerPoint presentation of 3–5 slides, plus cover and reference slides, to inform a set of potential stakeholders at the practice site you have identified for a proposed EBP QI project. Although you will not make your presentation, it should be authentic to the purpose and include the following:
- Introduce the framework or model you have selected for the EBP QI project and your reasoning. (1–2 slides)
- Present a draft of the proposed practice problem. Include notes for each slide describing points you would make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. (2–3 slides)
There is no submission this week.
Module 3 Assignment is due by Day 7 of Week 6.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
What’s Coming Up in Week 5?
Photo Credit: [BrianAJackson]/[iStock / Getty Images Plus]/Getty Images
Next week you will begin an introduction to translation science as a component of evidence-based practice and quality improvement projects. Remember to access the interactive DNP Glossary in the Learning Resources for needed clarity on this and other key terms as you move through the course.
Week 5: Module 3 Assignment Activities
Continue to develop the Module 3 Assignment, including investigating three health care settings within your community or region as potential sites for an EBP QI project. Keep in mind your work in this Assignment is hypothetical and intended to help prepare for, not execute, your DNP Project. Although you may make informal contacts at your focus sites, do not make any formal inquiries about a site hosting a possible project.
Plan your time accordingly in researching and preparing both Parts 1 and 2 of the Assignment. You are encouraged to complete the gathering of required information for the Part 1 written paper this week.
Next Week
Week 4: Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement, and Implementation Science: Interrelationships
From your experience as a registered nurse or APRN, how does change occur in a health care setting? How do outdated protocols get updated or the actual root cause of a persistent problem get uncovered and resolved?
You may have answers that speak to the commitment of health care organizations to continually improve. You may also have examples that demonstrate the inherent challenges in any change initiative. If only change were as clear and quick as striking a key. Rather, it requires a whole series of figurative keystrokes and, depending on the setting, may seem as though the whole world needs to be onboard.
This week you will explore a particular set of keys to quality improvement in health care. It involves reliance on science for evidence to inform nursing practice and implementation that makes sense to practitioners and patients. Your getting-started activities will include observing for and blogging about evidence-based practice, and looking for health care settings in your locale for investigating needs and acceptance of practice change.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Evaluate application of evidence-based practice in health care organizations
- Analyze approaches to advocacy of evidence-based practice in health care organizations
- Compare health care settings for quality improvement projects
- Justify practice problems for quality improvement
- Analyze site and stakeholder requirements for quality improvement projects in nursing practice settings
- Compare stakeholder requirements for quality improvement projects across nursing practice settings
- Apply implementation science frameworks/models for evidence-based practice quality improvement projects
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)
McEwen, M., & Wills, E. M. (2019). Theoretical basis for nursing (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (Eds.). (2019). Translation of evidence into nursing and healthcare (3rd ed.). Springer.
- Chapter 1, “Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 3–25); for reading about the PET model, focus on pp.14–16
- Chapter 2, “The Science of Translation and Major Frameworks” (pp. 27–58)
- Chapter 8, “Methods for Translation” (pp. 185–187 Quality Improvement and RCPI)
- Chapter 9, “Project Management for Translation” (pp. 199–228)
Dang, D., & Dearholt, S. L. (Eds.). (2018). Johns Hopkins nursing evidence-based practice: Model and guidelines (3rd ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.
- Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 79–96)
Note: The survey findings can be used to explore relationships between nursing attitudes concerning QI and other organizational characteristics such as QI environment.
Document: College of Nursing PowerPoint Template (PPT document)
Document: DNP Project Process Guide (Word document)
Required Media (click to expand/reduce)
Walden University. (2011). An evidence-based practice model [Video]. Author.
Translation text lead author Kathleen White discusses the PET model.
Accessible player –Downloads– Download Video w/CC Download Audio Download Transcript
Optional Resources (click to expand/reduce)
Hi Andrea, Great Post! I agree with your assessment that the Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) model is the most appropriate science translation model to achieve the outcome of obtaining euvolemic weight upon discharge of CHF admitted patients(Seedat,2023). The KTA model provides a systematic approach to implement evidence-based knowledge into clinical practice, which aligns with the goal of ensuring that euvolemic weight measurement becomes a routine part of discharge teaching for CHF patients. In the context of your practice problem, the KTA model can guide the translation process as follows: 1. Knowledge Creation: Assess the available evidence regarding the importance of obtaining euvolemic weight upon discharge of CHF patients. This could involve reviewing relevant research studies, clinical guidelines, and expert opinions. 2. Knowledge to Action Cycle: Identify the barriers and facilitators to obtaining euvolemic weight before discharge. This could include factors such as time constraints, lack of awareness, or inadequate resources(Seedat,2023). By understanding the barriers, strategies can be developed to overcome them. 3. Adaptation and Tailoring: Tailor the knowledge to fit the specific context of the healthcare setting(Seedat,2023). This could involve developing protocols, guidelines, or standardized procedures for obtaining euvolemic weight. These materials should be clear, concise, and easily accessible to nurses(Seedat,2023). 4. Implementation Planning: Develop an implementation plan that outlines the steps, resources, and timeline for integrating euvolemic weight measurement into discharge teaching(Seedat,2023). This plan should include training sessions for nurses, communication strategies, and any necessary modifications to the workflow. 5. Monitoring and Evaluation: Continuously monitor the implementation process and evaluate its effectiveness(Seedat,2023). This could involve measuring the frequency and accuracy of euvolemic weight measurement, assessing nurses’ adherence to the new practice, and soliciting feedback from both nurses and patients. By following the KTA model, you can systematically address the barriers and challenges associated with obtaining euvolemic weight upon discharge of CHF patients(Seedat,2023). The model allows for the identification of strategies to overcome these barriers, ensures that the practice change is tailored to the specific context, and provides a framework for ongoing monitoring and evaluation. Ultimately, the KTA model will help facilitate the integration of euvolemic weight measurement into discharge teaching, leading to improved patient outcomes by enabling early identification of fluid imbalances and timely interventions to minimize symptoms and prevent readmissions (Seedat,2023).
Seedat, J. (2023). The knowledge-to-action process model for knowledge translation in oral care in South Africa. The South African Journal of Communication Disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif Vir Kommunikasieafwykings, 70(1), e1–e9. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.951
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Top of Form
Name: NURS_8114_Module3_Assignment_Rubric
| Excellent
90%–100% | Good
80%–89% | Fair
70%–79% | Poor
0%–69% | |
| The Assignment: Part 1: Key Project Elements In a paper of 6–8 pages, plus cover page and references page, include the following: • Describe the three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project. For each health care setting, identify the following defining features: patient population, mission, public or private entity, single institution or member of a corporation, and others you identify as significant. | Points Range:9 (4.50%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with a clear, accurate, and detailed identification of all defining features and others you identify as significant. | Points Range:8 (4.00%) – 8 (4.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with clear and accurate identification of all defining features; there may not be others identified as significant. | Points Range:7 (3.50%) – 7 (3.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate description of three health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with vague and/or inaccurate identification of defining features and no others identified as significant. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 6 (3.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate description of three or fewer health care settings that you explored as proposed sites for an EBP QI project, with vague and inaccurate or missing identification of defining features and no others identified as significant. |
| • Compare the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples. | Points Range:14 (7.00%) – 15 (7.50%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. The response fully synthesizes and integrates at least three scholarly resources that fully support the comparison provided. | Points Range:12 (6.00%) – 13 (6.50%)
The response provides a clear and accurate comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. The response synthesizes and integrates at least two scholarly resources that support the comparison provided. | Points Range:11 (5.50%) – 11 (5.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. The response somewhat synthesizes and integrates two scholarly resources that may support the comparison provided. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing comparison of the settings for strengths and weaknesses as sites for an EBP QI project. The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources or is missing resources. |
| • Explain the practice problems that you explored based on your interests and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. | Points Range:9 (4.50%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. | Points Range:8 (4.00%) – 8 (4.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. | Points Range:7 (3.50%) – 7 (3.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 6 (3.00%)
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing explanation of the practice problems that you explored based on your interests, and identified needs of the health care settings you investigated. |
| • Explain why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. Be specific and provide examples. | Points Range:14 (7.00%) – 15 (7.50%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. The response fully synthesizes and integrates at least three scholarly resources that fully support the explanation provided. | Points Range:12 (6.00%) – 13 (6.50%)
The response provides a clear and accurate explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. The response synthesizes and integrates at least two scholarly resources that support the explanation provided. | Points Range:11 (5.50%) – 11 (5.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. The response somewhat synthesizes and integrates two scholarly resources that may support the explanation provided. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a vague, inaccurate, or missing explanation of why each problem is a potential focus for an EBP QI project. The response minimally and/or inaccurately synthesizes and integrates one or two scholarly resources or is missing resources. |
| • For each health care setting, describe the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. | Points Range:9 (4.50%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. | Points Range:8 (4.00%) – 8 (4.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. | Points Range:7 (3.50%) – 7 (3.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate description of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 6 (3.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate and/or missing descriptions of the stakeholders whose approval would be required to initiate an EBP QI project and implement the results. |
| • Compare similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. | Points Range:14 (7.00%) – 15 (7.50%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. | Points Range:12 (6.00%) – 13 (6.50%)
The response provides a clear and accurate comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. | Points Range:11 (5.50%) – 11 (5.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate, or missing, comparison of similarities and differences in stakeholder requirements across the settings. |
| • Identify the one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem you have selected as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders, and explain your choices. | Points Range:9 (4.50%) – 10 (5.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a clear, accurate, and detailed explanation of those choices. | Points Range:8 (4.00%) – 8 (4.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a clear and accurate explanation of those choices. | Points Range:7 (3.50%) – 7 (3.50%)
The response provides a vague and/or inaccurate identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a vague and/or inaccurate explanation of one or both choices. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 6 (3.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate, and/or missing identification of one proposed health care setting/practice site and/or one proposed practice problem as the focus of a hypothetical presentation to stakeholders; and a vague and inaccurate and/or missing explanation of one or both choices. |
| The Assignment: Part 2: Implementation Science Presentation In a PowerPoint presentation of 3–5 slides, plus cover and references slides, include the following: • Introduce the framework or model you have selected for the EBP QI project and your reasoning. (1–2 slides) | Points Range:45 (22.50%) – 50 (25.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and clear, accurate, and detailed reasoning. | Points Range:40 (20.00%) – 44 (22.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and clear and accurate reasoning. | Points Range:35 (17.50%) – 39 (19.50%)
The response provides a vague or inaccurate introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and vague or inaccurate reasoning. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 34 (17.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate or missing introduction of the framework or model you selected for the EBP QI project and vague, inaccurate, or missing reasoning. |
| • Present a draft of the proposed practice problem. Include notes for each slide describing points you would make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. (2–3 slides) | Points Range:45 (22.50%) – 50 (25.00%)
The response provides a clear, accurate, and detailed presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including clear, accurate, and detailed notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. | Points Range:40 (20.00%) – 44 (22.00%)
The response provides a clear and accurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including mostly clear and accurate notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. | Points Range:35 (17.50%) – 39 (19.50%)
The response provides a vague or inaccurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, including some vague or inaccurate notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 34 (17.00%)
The response provides a vague and inaccurate presentation of a draft of the proposed practice problem, with vague and inaccurate and/or mostly or completely missing notes for each slide describing points to make to the assembled stakeholders to obtain their approval or buy-in for the EBP QI project. |
| Written Expression and Formatting: Paragraph/ Sentence Structure Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are clearly structured and carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. | Points Range:5 (2.50%) – 5 (2.50%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity. | Points Range:4 (2.00%) – 4 (2.00%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. | Points Range:3 (1.50%) – 3 (1.50%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 2 (1.00%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. |
| Written Expression and Formatting: English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. | Points Range:5 (2.50%) – 5 (2.50%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. | Points Range:4 (2.00%) – 4 (2.00%)
Contains a few (1–2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | Points Range:3.5 (1.75%) – 3.5 (1.75%)
Contains several (3–4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 3 (1.50%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
| Written Expression and Formatting: The assignment contains parenthetical/in-text citations, and at least three evidence-based references are listed. | Points Range:5 (2.50%) – 5 (2.50%)
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least three evidence-based references are listed. | Points Range:4 (2.00%) – 4 (2.00%)
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least two evidence-based references are listed. | Points Range:3.5 (1.75%) – 3.5 (1.75%)
Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least one evidence-based references are listed. | Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 3 (1.50%)
Contains one or no parenthetical/in-text citations and no evidence-based references are listed. |
The rubric total value of 0.00 has been overridden with a value of 200.00 out of 200.
Name:NURS_8114_Module3_Assignment_Rubric
Bottom of Form
Don’t wait until the last minute
Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.