Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
Perfect Number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES TO GUIDE CLINICAL PRACTICES 2
Evidence-Based Practices to Guide Clinical Practices
In support of clinical decision-making, EBP has been given increasing attention. EBP is intended to integrate best evidence with clinical knowledge, patient values and the demand for excellent, cost-effective healthcare. In clinical practice and research, health professionals utilize instruments such as pain or depression scores. This article solely addresses quantitative analysis as a health research paradigm. Proof-based practice is one of the most up-to-date and effective methods for social work. (Bushell, 2019) EBP involves combining quantifiable scientific assessments and actions, taking account of preferences and resources available to consumers and communities. To show the impact of these treatments on a population, quantifiable scientific evaluations and interventions are investigated. EBP is a connection between research and practice in social work and other professions.
For the program of magnet recognition and the components if the model, the three main goals of new knowledge, innovation and changes in the magnet recognition program and thus promotes research, demonstration-based methods, and improved quality. There are three main objectives in the Magnet Recognition Program:
1) Promote excellence in a professional practice environment
2) Identify excellence in delivering patient or resident care services
3) Distribution of good nursing practices.
Health care professionals must be involved at all levels to achieve the goals and component “new knowledge innovation and improvements” of the Magnet Model. Many healthcare providers cannot and cannot differentiate in between them to fresh knowledge, innovation and scaling high. Research utilizes a technology to develop new knowledge (quantitative or qualitative). At the same time, the greatest clinical evidence for patient treatment are due to the EBP and are usually via research, and applies systematic processes to improve patient outcomes.
Research indicates that patient results are increasing in evidence-based nursing practices. The evidentiary practice (EBP) has been identified as a “troubleshooting approach involving conscientious use of current best practices by means of well-designed trials, clinical expertise and patient values and preferences,” showing increased patient safety, improved clinical results, reduced cost of medical treatment and decreased variation in patient outcomes. (Tucker, 2017) There are nevertheless barriers to the widespread implementation of contemporary findings in nursing, in particular the fluidity and level of clinical nursing competence.
Individual and organizational barriers have been identified to the utilization of research. Personal obstacles include a lack of research knowledge and critical studies, a not properly understanding research, other members of staff who do not support changes in practice and the lack of power to modify the practices on nurses. The organizational constraints stipulated therefore incorporates the implementation of new ideas and not having access to the understanding and research tools.
Research indicates that support for the use of and conduct of research by the employing organizations is the main factor in the EBP of nurses. Other facilitators include advanced nursing professionals, mentors in research, competent teachers, nursing research internships and authorized nursing clinical researchers.
Funk and colleagues have suggested ways in their BARRIERS study to reduce EBP barriers to models of research involvement, to build college connections with academics and to engage in groups of research interest. The Magnet Recognition Program has recently recognized similar concepts. The assessment of the training program was assisted by a mixed approach design. A survey design was utilized in advance to assess the clinicians’ effect on the training program. Concentrations and interviews with physicians and administrators were performed to check their understanding of the training program. The appropriate institutional ethics body was provided ethical explanation. (Lee 2016).
Sample and specimen
Participants were selected from the administrative staff that applied for the training program in teams. Each study team required to contain a minimum of one health care doctor whose work was clinically restricted and without administrative or research responsibility. In two years, a total of 27 teams and 153 clinicians (including 78 RN) were admitted for training (2011-2013). Over the first two years, RNs headed 10 teams and 30 additional staff members from 25 supporting teams. These doctors are asked to complete a fundamental survey and two follow-up surveys and to participate in focus groups. These doctors’ administrative supervisors were invited to engage in qualitative interviews. (Brooks, McKiernan & Patterson, 2015)
Intervention
Potential research teams presented Letters of Intent detailing team composition and proposed research topics and evaluated by an advisory committee consisting of academic and clinical experts on feasibility and therapeutic relevance. Authorized teams were asked to participate in the training program and a research mentor was chosen to assist develop the whole research endeavor. The study teams attended three research workshops that offered essential information about research techniques, research ethics and literary review processes. (Bushell, 2019) Following the seminars, the research teams had three months to prepare a short proposal with their assigned mentor. Their feasibility, relevance and excellent design were assessed and the small study funds (CA$2,000-$5,000) awarded. The submissions have been evaluated. In the following year, sponsored research teams performed and participated in the translation of material.
Knowledge survey, attitudes and tool practice
The Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice (KAP) survey is a means of evaluating 33 research activities, including the use and application by RN and other health professionals of research conducted in clinical practice. The KAP covers five factors: identifying clinical issues, developing best practice guidelines, research in practice, implementing research, and conducting and disseminating research. The participants showed the level of knowledge, desire to participate (attitudes and the capability of a full study and translation of information) for each activity specified in the survey (practices).
Surveys of Data Collection
These devices were controlled at different phases of the training program using online survey software in three waves (fluid surveys; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada). The baseline survey (1) was performed once the program was registered. Survey 2 was carried out three months later after the research sessions were finished and recommendations received. After their fundamental duties were completed, the final survey (Survey 3) was conducted between 18 and 24 months. The ultimate data collecting length varied due to external factors (for example, delayed accumulation and loss of team members), resulting to longer time for some teams to investigate. (LoBiondo-Wood, Haber & Titler, n.d.)
Analysis of data
Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographic information. Means and SDs have been used to describe the degree of knowledge, desire and expertise in survey waves. A linear mixed regression analysis was used to assess the effect of training at different program phases, comparing results obtained across time. This method has been used to connect measurements of the same topic and to include people with incomplete data, mainly because participants did not finalize all three samples. Average variations in average survey wave results have been identified for and where appropriate as standard effect sizes. The statistical data analysis was done using Windows version 9.2 of the SAS system.
Concentrations and interviews have been recorded and transcribed. Line by line were examined for transcripts of ideas built into coding systems. Line by line. Line by line. At least two researchers have coded and verified transcripts and inconsistencies until agreement has been achieved. Coded data have been incorporated into quality management software (Brooks, Patterson & McKiernan, 2015). Key topics and connections were discovered using a thematic analysis method, verified by multiple research team members.
The objective of this EBP intervention and assessment is to enhance knowledge and practice of EBP by including health professionals in the development of evidence for research. This new method bridges the conventional gap between clinical practice and research, allowing clinicians to identify issues and provide them with information, skills and resources to find evidence-based solutions. We wanted to work for research enthusiastically and EBP by engaging experts in research. The findings of this study indicate that a research training program may effectively enhance clinical research knowledge and skills, and provide a feeling of confidence and enthusiasm for clinical practice. However, the willingness to participate in research did not alter substantially. The participants’ willingness to participate in future research may be reduced by the time obstacles identified by many participants and by the difficulties inherent to research. (Davidson, Malloch, Weberg & Porter-O’Grady, 2016).
Various additional methods, including journal clubs, EBP training programs, knowledge brokers and mentoring programs, were suggested to promote EBP among physicians. Some of these possible treatments in EBP attitudes have not changed EBP behavior. Although the effect of the EBP training program was not statistically evaluated, the participants’ critical thinking and understanding of the links between research and practice have significantly increased. (Tucker, 2017) Many people expressed a broader commitment to enhance the course and clinical practice by reviewing standards of practice and developing patient and professional resources. (Tucker, 2017)
The administrator research training program demonstrates an excellent way to improve EBP, build academic linkages and create professional development opportunities for physicians. Support for these programs emphasizes the significance and value of research and EBP that may contribute to making a health organization one of the finest and best doctors with a strong culture of research and maintain it.
In short, EBP can no longer be an abstract term or an idealism. The research training program assessed in the study underlines the significance of clinical practice research and makes it possible for EBP to play a leadership role for physicians.
References
Bushell, M. (2019). Supporting your practice: Evidence-based Medicine. Australian Pharmacist,
38, 3, 46-55.
Tucker, S., 2017. People, Practices, and Places: Realities That Influence Evidence-Based
Practice Uptake. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(2), pp.87-89.
Brooks, C., Patterson, D. and McKiernan, P., 2015. Group Supervision Attitudes: Supervisory
Practices Fostering Resistance to Adoption of Evidence-Based Practices. The Qualitative
Report.
Lee, S., 2016. Implementing evidence-based practices improves neonatal outcomes. Evidence
Based Medicine, 21(6), pp.231-231.
LoBiondo-Wood, G., Haber, J., & Titler, M. Evidence-based practice for nursing and healthcare
quality improvement.
Davidson, S., Weberg, D., Malloch, K., & Porter-O’Grady, T. (2016).
Leadership for Evidence-Based Innovation in Nursing and Health Professions. Sudbury:
Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). |
Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. |
10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!