Nursing Assignment Acers

NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

Objectives:

  1. Explain how translational research can be used for safety and quality improvement initiatives related to improving population health.
  2. Discuss common barriers for translating research into practice.
Topic 5 DQ 1

Assessment Description

Identify either a safety or quality improvement initiative related to improving population health. Explain how translational research can influence the development of the initiative. Include a specific example to support your response.

ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

Topic 5 DQ 2

Assessment Description

Identify a quality initiative from your workplace. What were some barriers to implementation? What are common barriers for translating research into practice?

Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to provide research evidence in support of the PICOT you developed for your selected topic.

Conduct a search for 10 peer-reviewed, translational research articles published within the last 5 years that demonstrate support for your PICOT. You may include previous research articles from assignments completed in this course. Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” provided to evaluate the articles and explain how the research supports your PICOT.

Once your instructor returns this assignment, review the feedback and make any revisions necessary. If you are directed by your instructor to select different articles in order to meet the assignment criteria or to better support your PICOT, make these changes accordingly. You will use the literature evaluated in this assignment for all subsequent assignments you develop as part of your evidence-based practice project proposal in this course and in NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

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.

Attachments

Literature Evaluation Table

Learner Name:

PICOT:


Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article 
Article Title and Year Published

 

Research Questions/ Hypothesis, and Purpose/Aim of Study

 

Design (Quantitative, Qualitative, or other)

 

Setting/Sample

 

Methods: Intervention/ Instruments

 

Analysis/Data Collection

 

Outcomes/Key Findings

 

Recommendations

 

Explanation of How the Article Supports Your Proposed EBP Practice Project Proposal
   

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Resources – NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

  1. Differentiating Between Research and Quality Improvement

    Read “Differentiating Between Research and Quality Improvement,” by Gregory, from Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing (2015). https://www.nursingcenter.com/pdfjournal?AID=3099809&an=00005237-201504000-00005&Journal_ID=54008&Issue_ID=3099787

  2. Translating Evidence into Practice: How Advanced Practice RNs Can Guide Nurses in Challenging Established Practice to Arrive at Best Practice

     

  3. Quality Improvement in Athletic Health Care

    Read “Quality Improvement in Athletic Health Care,” by Sauers, Sauers, and Valier, from Journal of Athletic Training (2017). https://www-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/1980695228?accountid=7374

     

  4. Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare

    Read Chapters 4 and 9 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare. https://bibliu.com/app/#/view/books/9781496386892/

     

  5. Lost in Translation: The Promise and Problems of the Globalization of Research

     

  6. Eliminating Cardiovascular Health Disparities: There has Been Progress, but There is More to Do!

    Read “Eliminating Cardiovascular Health Disparities: There has Been Progress, but There is More to Do!” by Coke, from The Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing (2018). 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=00005082-201811000-00003&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

     

  7. Decreasing Barriers to Research Utilization Among Labor and Delivery Nurses

     

  8. Population Health: Creating a Culture of Wellness

    Read Chapter 8 in Population Health: Creating a Culture of Wellness. https://bibliu.com/app/?bibliuMagicToken=RciiTVup3hDfOMcnygFRniztU3ofeiwq#/view/books/9781284166613/

 

Rubric Criteria

PICOT

Criteria Description

PICOT

5. Excellent

7.5 points

The PICOT is clearly and accurately presented.

4. Good

6.9 points

NA

3. Satisfactory

6.6 points

NA

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The PICOT is omitted. NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

Articles

Criteria Description

Articles

5. Excellent

15 points

Sources are current and highly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurate.

4. Good

13.8 points

Sources are current and generally appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are minor errors.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Number of required sources is met, but some sources are outdated or inappropriate. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are errors.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Number of required sources is only partially met. Article citations and permalinks are presented. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Required number of sources are not included. Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study

Criteria Description

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study

5. Excellent

15 points

A discussion on the research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study is thoroughly and accurately presented for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is adequately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for one or more articles is omitted.

Study Design

Criteria Description

Study Design

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the study design for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

The study design is adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The study design is indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The study design for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The study design for one or more article is omitted.

Setting and Sample

Criteria Description

Setting and Sample

5. Excellent

15 points

The setting and sample in which the researcher conducted the study are detailed and accurate for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

The setting and sample are adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The setting and sample are omitted for one or more of the articles.

Methods

Criteria Description

Methods

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies. NUR 550 Topic 5: Translating Evidence Into Practice To Improve Safety And Quality And Eliminate Barriers

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The method of study is presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

Analysis and Data Collection

Criteria Description

Analysis and Data Collection

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the analysis and data collection for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Analysis and data collection for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Analysis and data collection are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Analysis and data collection for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the analysis and data collection are incomplete.

Outcomes and Key Findings

Criteria Description

Outcomes and Key Findings

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the outcomes and key findings collection for each article are presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Outcomes and key findings are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Outcomes and key findings for one or more articles are omitted. Overall, the outcomes and key findings are incomplete.

Recommendations

Criteria Description

Recommendations

5. Excellent

15 points

Researcher recommendations are accurately and thoroughly described for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

Criteria Description

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

5. Excellent

15 points

A detailed explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is clearly evident.

4. Good

13.8 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Adequate support for the evidence-based project proposal is demonstrated.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

A general explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is generally evident.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how the article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is omitted for one or more of the articles. The explanation for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

Mechanics of Writing

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)

5. Excellent

7.5 points

The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good

6.9 points

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.

3. Satisfactory

6.6 points

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.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

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.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.

Total150 points

 

mersin escmersin esc