Tag: Clinical-Nursing

NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

This week you begin working on Application 3. As a nurse engaged in advanced practice, you have the exciting opportunity to be a leader in translating evidence into practice.

For this first section of Application 3, consider the economic and financial implications of addressing your EBP Assignment issue. NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice. In addition, reflect on your leadership skills. As a DNP-prepared nurse, you are expected to employ the principles of business, finance, and health policy in the development of initiatives that will improve the quality of care delivered.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Prepare
 for this week’s section of Application 3 as follows:

Continue (from this week’s Discussion) to evaluate the new strategies you developed to address your selected issue and the potential economic impact.

Review Chapter 6 in the course text, Translation of Evidence Into Nursing and Health Care Practice, and ask yourself the following: How are these activities enhancing my leadership skills? How does translating evidence enable me, as a leader, to affect or strengthen health care delivery and my nursing practice?

You will build on this Application next week as you look at advancing new approaches to practice through the policy process. NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

By Day 7 of Week 7 OF Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Application 3 is due. You do not need to submit anything this week.

Practicum FOR  Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Continue to keep a time log and journal of your practicum experiences. See the Practicum Guidelines located in the Practicum area of the Course Overview page for a complete description of the practicum.

By Day 7 of Week 7 OF Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Reminder:
 You will submit your time log and a journal entry in Week 7.

Week in Review

This week
, you evaluated economic impacts of new practice strategies and integrated theoretical foundations in developing evidence-based practice strategies. You also appraised your personal growth in leadership skills.

Next week
, you will explore how to utilize the concepts presented in earlier weeks to advocate for health care policy to improve health-related outcomes.

NURS 8410 Week 6: The Application of New Practice Approaches, Part I

The first several weeks of this course have presented the foundational information necessary for you and your colleagues to develop new practice strategies. Think of the EBP Assignment issue that you have been addressing in this course. NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice. How could you synthesize the evidence you reviewed for Application 2 and what you have learned in this course to create a new approach?

This week you formulate evidence-based practice strategies designed to promote health care quality, and develop a plan for evaluating these strategies as well. As you begin Application 3, you consider the financial and economic impact of implementing these new strategies. As you continue your practicum experience, you are asked to reflect on your leadership skills and your ability to integrate business, finance, and health policy principles in the development of initiatives that will improve the quality of care delivered.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Integrate theoretical foundations in the development of evidence-based practice strategies

Evaluate the potential economic impact of new practice strategies that address a selected specialty issue

Appraise personal growth in leadership skills

NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Photo Credit: Hero Images / Hero Images / Getty Images

Learning Resources

Note:
 To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the 
Course Materials
 section of your Syllabus.

NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice Required Readings

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terharr, M. F. (2016). 
Translation of evidence into nursing and health care practice
 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Chapter 6, “Translation of Evidence for Leadership”

Balakas, K., Sparks, L., Steurer, L., & Bryant, T. (2013). An outcome of evidence-based practiced education: Sustained clinical decision-making among bedside nurses. 
Journal of Pediatric Nursing
, 28, 479-485.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Brown, D.S. (2012). Interview with quality leaders: Dr. Donna E. Shalala and Dr. Linda Burnes Bolton on the committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation initiative on the future of nursing at the Institute of Medicine. 
Journal for Healthcare Quality
, 24(4), 40-44.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Brandt, B., Lutfiyya, M.N., King, J.A., & Chioresco, C. ( 2014). A scoping review of interprofessional collaborative practice and education using the lens of the Triple Aim. 
Journal of Interprofessional Care
, 28(5), 393-399.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Grindel, C.G. (2016). Clinical leadership: A call to action. Med-Surg Nursing, 25(1), 9-16.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Mannix, J., Wilkes, L, & Daly, J. (2015). Grace under fire: Aesthetic leadership in clinical nursing, 
Journal of Clinical Nursing
, 24, 2649-2658.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Stetler, C.B., Ritchie, J.A., Rycroft-Malone, J., & Charns, M.P. (2014). Leadership for evidence-based practice: Strategic and functional behaviors for institutionalizing EBP. 
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing
, 11(4), 219-226.

Note:
You will access this article from the Walden Library databases. NURS 8410 Week 6 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy

“I think one’s feelings waste themselves in words; they ought all to be distilled into actions which bring results.”

—Florence Nightingale

Through the policy process, nurses can put their feelings—as well as their experiences and expertise—into actions that create results. In this course, you have been honing your skills for critically assessing evidence with the purpose of improving practice and developing new practice approaches. As a DNP-prepared nurse, you can influence health care outcomes at the population or aggregate level. Leading policy development to address health care concerns is a vital way to achieve this. Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

For the past several weeks, you have been focusing on a health care issue of interest to you for your EBP Assignment. For this Discussion, consider how you could lead policy development in support of a proposed evidence-based practice approach that addresses that issue and is designed to promote quality.

Reference: Nursing Schools. (2012). 
100 entertaining and inspiring quotes for nurses
. Retrieved from http://www.nursingschools.net/blog/2010/06/100-entertaining-inspiring-quotes-for-nurses/

To prepare of Discussion: Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy:

Select one of the new practice approaches you developed for the Week 6 Discussion.

Review the Trautman (2009) article listed in the Learning Resources. Assess the strategies for engaging in the policy process.

NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion: Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy

By Day 3 of Discussion: Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy

Post
 a cohesive response that addresses the following:

Identify your proposed practice approach in the first line of your posting.

How would you lead policy development for your selected issue?

What strategies could you use to overcome barriers you may encounter while engaging policy makers? (Select two or more strategies to focus on in your posting.) Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion.

Read
 a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Discussion: Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy

Respond
 to 
two
 of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom and/or from your own research in the Walden Library. Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return
 to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Submission and Grading Information

Rubric Detail

Select 
Grid View
 or 
List View
 to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8410_ Week7_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 
(16.67%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 
(13.33%)
 – 4 
(13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 
(0%)
 – 3 
(10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. Advocating for New Practice Approaches Through Policy NURS 8410 Week 7 Discussion

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8410_ Week7_Discussion_Rubric

NURS 8410 Week 7 Assignment: Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Reflect on your growth, professionally and personally, since you embarked on your DNP journey. The AACN believes that one of the benefits of a practice doctorate is that it enhances your leadership skills to “strengthen practice and health care delivery” (2006, p. 5). As you continue to engage in your practicum experience, be cognizant of your growth in these areas.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

In Week 6, you were asked to reflect on your leadership skills for this Assignment. This week, you continue your reflection on leadership and how you can lead the translation of evidence to practice through contribution to policy development. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

Prepare
 for this week’s section of Application 3 as follows:

Building on the work you began in Week 6 for this Application, review this week’s Discussion posting, and consider how you can lead policy development to address your EBP Assignment issue.

The full Application 3 is due by 
Day 7
of this week. Instructions for how to prepare for previous sections of this Application have been provided in Week 6. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

To complete Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice:

Write a 3- to 5-page paper that synthesizes:

Your vision of yourself as a leader—specifically:

How you would continue to increase your knowledge and awareness of financial, economic, and other concerns related to new practice approaches

How translating evidence would enable you to affect or strengthen health care delivery and nursing practice

How you would advocate for the use of new evidence-based practice approaches through the policy arena

By Day 7 of Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Application 3 is due.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.

Click the 
Week 7 Assignment Rubric 
to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.

Click the 
Week 7 Assignment 
link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.

Next, from the Attach File area, click on the 
Browse My Computer
 button. Find the document you saved as “WK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click 
Open
.

If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for 
I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database
. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

Click on the 
Submit
 button to complete your submission.

NURS 8410 Week 7 Assignment Application 3: Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice (6 points)

To students: 
In addition to the Learning Resources and facilitated discussions provided each week, you are expected to integrate articles from peer-reviewed journals to inform and support your positions and conclusions in the Application Assignments. Graduate-level scholarship provides the foundation for your work and requires a higher level of evidence than lay references, such as the dictionary, Wikipedia, general Internet sites, nursing newspapers, expert opinion, and the like.

Write a  2- to 3-page paper that summarizes:

Your vision of yourself as a leader—specifically:

How you would continue to increase your knowledge and awareness of financial, economic, and other concerns related to new practice approaches (2 pts)

How translating evidence would enable you to affect or strengthen health care delivery and nursing practice (2 pts)

How you would advocate for the use of new evidence-based practice approaches through the policy arena (2 pts) Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

 

Note:
 Up to 2 points may be deducted for grammar, spelling, and/or APA errors.

This Application is due by 
Day 7
 of 
Week 7
.

NURS 8410 Week 7: The Application of New Practice Approaches, Part II

“Engagement in the process of policy development is central to creating a health care system that meets the needs of its constituents” (AACN, 2006, p. 13).

As a professional nurse, you are well positioned to affect changes in health care through policy. Nurses are frequently asked to testify before Congress or congressional committees on important health care matters; being able to present the scientific evidence on a health care issue can contribute to this process and thereby inform the formation of health policy. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

This week, you explore how to utilize the concepts presented in earlier weeks to advocate for health care policy to improve health-related outcomes. In addition, you submit your time log and a journal entry for your practicum experience.

Reference: American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2006). 
The essentials of doctoral education for advanced nursing practice
. Retrieved from http://www.aacn.nche.edu/publications/position/DNPEssentials.pdf

Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice Learning Objectives

Students will:

Develop strategies for advocating for health policy to enhance health care outcomes

Analyze professional growth and development as a leader in evidence-based practice

Assess the practicum experience

Photo Credit: Hero Images / Hero Images / Getty Images

Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice Learning Resources

Note:
 To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the 
Course Materials
 section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terharr, M. F. (2016). 
Translation of evidence into nursing and health care practice
 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Chapter 4, “Translation of Evidence to Improve Clinical Outcomes”

Chapter 5, “Translation of Evidence for Improving Safety and Quality”

Chapter 7, “Translation of Evidence for Health Policy”

Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice

Andermann, A., Pang, T., Newton, J.T., Davis, A., & Panisset, U. (2016). Evidence for health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice.
 Health Research Policy and Systems,
 14 (17) doi 10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Catallo, C. & Sidani, S. The self-assessment for organizational capacity instrument for evidence-informed health policy: Preliminary reliability and validity of an instrument (2014). 
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing
, 11(1), 35–45.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Malterud, K., Bjelland, K., & Elvbakken, K.T. (Evidence-based medicine – an appropriate tool for evidence-based health policy? A case study from Norway. 
Health Research Policy and Systems,
 14 (15) doi 10.1186/s12961-016-0088-1

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Rehfuess, E.A., Durao, S., Kyamanywa, P., Meerpohl, J. J., Young, T., & Rohwer, A. (2016). An approach for setting evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities in low- and middle-income countries,
 Policy & Practice
, 94, 297–305 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.162966

Note:
You will access this article from the Walden Library databases. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

NURS 8410 Week 7 Practicum: Journal and Time Log

By Day 7

You will submit a journal entry (along with your time log) for Weeks 4-7. Journal entries need to connect your previous professional experience with your practice, competencies/concepts in the program, and the literature. Your journal entry should be week-based and sequential so that all journal entries are contained in one file.

Describe the observed activity.

Using an evidence-based approach, analyze the problem, issue, or situation. Address questions posed in the weekly practicum pages if appropriate.

Reveal how the real-world might mirror or diverge from program-related evidence, concepts, and/or theories.

Time Log submission.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Practicum for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK7Practicum+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.

Click the 
Week 7 Practicum 
link.

Next, from the Attach File area, click on the 
Browse My Computer
 button. Find the document you saved as “WK7Practicum+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click 
Open
.

If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for 
I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database
.

Click on the 
Submit
button to complete your submission. Becoming a Leader in the Translation of Evidence to Practice.

NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay

Discussion: Preparing for Change

What steps might be utilized to move a practice issue from development and design through implementation to the realization of positive outcomes? How does theory provide a framework? What barriers might you encounter?

To prepare for Discussion: Preparing for Change:

Review the theories and frameworks (i.e., change, organizational, behavioral) presented in Chapter 3 of the course text, 
Translation of Evidence Into Nursing and Health Care Practice
, and conduct additional research of your own. What insights do these theories provide regarding how to take your practice issue from development and design through implementation to the realization of positive outcomes?

Think about your practicum setting and evaluate the readiness for change in this environment. Identify barriers and facilitators for change. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay.

Consider strategies to address the barriers, and assess why they might be effective based on theory.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

By Day 3 of Discussion: Preparing for Change

Post
 a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

Assess the readiness for change in your practicum environment. Discuss those factors (barriers and facilitators) that need to be considered.

Identify a theory or framework that will guide your change efforts.

Discuss strategies to address barriers, and provide one or more insights regarding why you think they might be effective based on theory.

Read
 a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Discussion: Preparing for Change

Respond
 to 
two
 of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom and/or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return
 to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay.

Submission and Grading Information

Rubric Detail

Select 
Grid View
 or 
List View
 to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8410_ Week8_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 
(16.67%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 
(13.33%)
 – 4 
(13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 
(0%)
 – 3 
(10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. NURS 8410 Week 8 Discussion: Preparing for Change Essay

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8410_ Week8_Discussion_Rubric

Planning for Change Essay Assignment

Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignment

Planning for Change

Change can be difficult—and implementing new practices based on evidence can present challenges. How can you effectively prepare your work environment for change? What factors need to be considered (e.g., financial, legislative, systems)?

This week you begin working on Application 4, which builds on this week’s Discussion and is a continuation of your EBP Assignment. For this first section of the assignment, determine the factors that would impact stakeholders or end users as you create change and implement a new process/project to address your EBP issue.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Prepare
 for this week’s section of Application 4 as follows:

Continue (from this week’s Discussion) to analyze the impact of implementing change in your practice environment. What factors need to be considered regarding stakeholders or end users? How would you communicate with them to address their questions or concerns? How would you enlist their support? Planning for Change Essay Assignment.

Develop a summary of the methods you would use to ensure that those factors are adequately addressed.

By Day 7 of Week 10 of Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignment

Application 4 is due. You do not need to submit anything this week.

Practicum- Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignment

Continue to keep a time log and journal of your practicum experiences. See the Practicum Guidelines located in the Practicum area of the Course Overview page for a complete description of the practicum Planning for Change Essay Assignment.

By Day 7 of Week 11 of Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignment

Reminder:
 You will submit your time log and a journal entry in Week 11.

Week in Review

This week
, you assessed change readiness in a practice environment and developed theory-based strategies to facilitate the implementation of change.

Next week
, you will assess an issue within an organization—analyzing the system at the macro- and micro-level—and identify strategies that can be used to assess the clinical environment and the associated nonclinical units that support the provision of quality.

NURS 8410 Week 8: Creating an Environment for Evidence-Based Practice

“What health care needs most are effective leaders who understand innovation and how it spreads, who respect the diversity of change itself, and who can nurture innovation in all its rich and many costumes” (Hyrkäs & Harvey, 2010, p. 1).

As a nurse engaged in advanced practice, you are uniquely positioned to motivate your colleagues and contribute toward the development of a culture that embraces change Planning for Change Essay Assignment. Yet, even with the worthwhile goal of translating evidence into practice, barriers present a formidable challenge in many settings in today’s health care system.

This week you examine barriers that may inhibit the adoption and implementation of evidence-based practice. You also explore change theories and consider how they can be applied to help create an environment that facilitates practice grounded in evidence and, ultimately, to promote the achievement of outcomes related to quality and safety.

In addition, you continue your practicum experience and begin Application 4 this week.

Planning for Change Essay Assignment Learning Objectives

Students will:

Assess the readiness for change in a practice environment

Develop theory-based strategies to facilitate the implementation of change in a practice environment

Photo Credit: [Sam Edwards]/[Caiaimage]/Getty Images

Planning for Change Essay Assignment Learning Resources

Note:
 To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the 
Course Materials
 section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terharr, M. F. (2016). 
Translation of evidence into nursing and health care practice
 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Review Chapter 3, “Change Theory and Models: Framework for Translation”

Chapter 14, “Creating a Culture That Promotes Translation”

Chapter 15, “Best Practices in Translation: Challenges and Barriers in Translation”

Darling, F. (2016). Practitioners’ views and barriers to implementation of the Keeping Birth Normal tool: A pilot study. 
British Journal of Midwifery
, 24(7), 508-519. Planning for Change Essay Assignment.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Sadeghi-Bazargani, H., Tabrizi, J.S., & Azami-Aghdash, S. (2014). Barriers to evidence-based medicine: a systematic review. 
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
, 20, 793-802.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Smith, E.L., Rice, K.L., & Agrell-Kann, M. (2015). Improving quality outcomes using a champion model for ancillary nursing staff, 
Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing
, 46(12), 539-541.

Note:
You will access this article from the Walden Library databases Planning for Change Essay Assignment.

Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay

NURS 8410 Week 9 Discussion: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives

Discussion: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives

The vice president of nursing, Dr. Sasha Mendez, has had a lot of complaints from patients and their families about the difficulties they experience navigating the system at her organization; e.g., going from the E.R. to admissions. Dr. Mendez’s nursing specialty area is psych/mental health. As such, she is very concerned about the stress this is causing the patients.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

What are the macro systems that are affecting patient satisfaction at Dr. Mendez’s facility? What micro systems should she also analyze to look at how the patient moves through—from entry, to possible admission, to possible discharge? How do these systems relate? What impacts each system?

The concepts presented in Week 8 serve as a foundation for this week as you continue to look at factors within an organization’s environment that are barriers and facilitators for implementing change. In this Discussion, you examine the macro and micro systems within the organization (of your practicum setting) and identify changes that may need to take place to facilitate quality improvement and achievement of patient safety outcomes. Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay.

To prepare for 
Discussion: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives
:

Reflect on the issue you have been addressing through your EBP Assignment.

Identify the macro and micro systems that influence the issue. Review the McClusky and Middleton (2010) article for an example of this process.

Determine the desired outcomes of resolving the EBP Assignment issue and how resolving it will improve quality and patient safety. (
Note:
Next week you will evaluate these outcomes. You may want to view the Week 10 Discussion as you prepare.) Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay.

What procedures/processes would need to be modified to achieve the desired outcomes?

Develop a 5-slide Microsoft PowerPoint presentation for the business unit team and leadership within the organization, sharing your issue, strategies for resolving the issue, and how it will improve quality and patient safety. 
Note:
 The purpose of the presentation is to persuade the business unit team and leadership to accept your recommendations.

By Day 3 of 
Discussion: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives

Post
 your PowerPoint presentation.

Read
 a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of 
Discussion: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives

Respond
 to 
two
 of your colleagues using the following scenario:

Imagine you are a manager from the business unit or leadership team who is also involved in your organization’s quality management committee. Employing this perspective, critique at least three of your colleagues’ presentations.

When critiquing your colleagues’ presentations be sure to:

Determine the extent to which the PowerPoint presentation convinces you that the appropriate systems were examined and that the identified outcomes are attainable

Provide feedback on whether you believe the suggested modifications to the systems will lead to the desired outcomes Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay

Return
 to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Submission and Grading Information

Rubric Detail

Select 
Grid View
 or 
List View
 to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8410_ Week9_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 
(16.67%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 
(13.33%)
 – 4 
(13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 
(0%)
 – 3 
(10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Initiatives Discussion Essay

Evaluation of Outcomes in EBP

Discussion: Evaluation of Outcomes

As you translate evidence into practice, it is essential to consider how you will evaluate the outcomes. As introduced in Week 8, you are likely to encounter barriers as you integrate research findings into practice. Using a framework for evaluation can assist in minimizing those barriers.

As a nurse engaged in advanced practice, it is now time to take your practicum project to the next level—evaluating the outcomes you identified for the Week 9 Discussion and then developing new practice guidelines.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

To prepare for Discussion: Evaluation of Outcomes:

The course text, Translation of Evidence Into Nursing and Health Care Practice, provides a list of questions that should be considered when planning for evaluation. See page 239 for this list of questions.

Review the Learning Resources focusing on the various evaluation frameworks presented. Select a framework and determine how you would evaluate the outcomes you identified in the Week 9 Discussion. Evaluation of Outcomes in EBP.

Based on the possible results of your evaluation, envision new practice guidelines you would develop.

What new standards of care might this lead to?

By Day 3 of Discussion: Evaluation of Outcomes

Post
 a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

In the first line of your posting, state the outcomes you are addressing (those you initially identified in the Week 9 Discussion).

How would you evaluate the outcomes? Support your response with evidence from the literature.

What new practice guidelines would you create based on your evaluation of those outcomes?

Discuss any new standards of care that would be appropriate based on the new practice guidelines.

Read
 a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Discussion: Evaluation of Outcomes

Respond
 to 
two
 of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research Evaluation of Outcomes in EBP.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom and/or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return
 to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Discussion: Evaluation of Outcomes Rubric Detail

Select 
Grid View
 or 
List View
 to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8410_ Week10_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Evaluation of Outcomes in EBP

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 
(16.67%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 
(13.33%)
 – 4 
(13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 
(0%)
 – 3 
(10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8410_ Week10_Discussion_Rubric

NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

Bring to mind an important practice-related decision you have made recently. How did you approach this decision? What aspects of your specialty expertise informed your decision-making?

Evaluate your decision now in light of the principles of clinical reasoning presented in the Learning Resources this week. What new insights arise about your decision making as you look at it through this lens? What questions emerge as you reflect how you use reasoning in your practice?

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

In this Discussion, you and your colleagues examine the application of reasoning strategies in your specialty area of practice, particularly as it is connected to your EBP Assignment question.

To prepare for Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area:

Consider the definition of 
clinical reasoning
 and how it is distinguished from other terms in the Simmons article.

Bring to mind key characteristics of your specialty area. Is the concept of clinical reasoning relevant and sufficient to describe the 
process
 you utilize as you make decisions and solve problems in your area of specialization? Why or why not? If not, what terminology would be more useful for defining or characterizing this process?

Review the literature to identify at least two specific examples of reasoning strategies used in your specialty area. These may be part of your literature review related to your EBP Assignment question(s).

Reflect on your EBP Assignment question(s). Reexamine your project question(s) through this lens of clinical, or alternately termed, reasoning. NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area.

By Day 3 of Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

Post 
a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

How are reasoning strategies most often applied in your specialty area? Provide at least two specific examples supported by the literature.

How can you apply reasoning strategies to the refinement of your EBP Assignment question(s)?

Read
a selection of your colleagues’ responses NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area.

By Day 6 of Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

Respond 
to 
two
 of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective, using readings from the classroom and/or from your own research in the Walden Library. NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return
 to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources. Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

Rubric Detail

Select 
Grid View
 or 
List View
 to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8410_ Week2_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONDiscussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

8 
(26.67%)
 – 8 
(26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 
(23.33%)
 – 7 
(23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 
(0%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 
(20%)
 – 6 
(20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 
(16.67%)
 – 5 
(16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 
(13.33%)
 – 4 
(13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 
(0%)
 – 3 
(10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. NURS 8410 Discussion: Reasoning in a Specialty Area

Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments

assignment
 1: Application 4: Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignments

Implementing EBP Projects

It is essential to consider those systems that inhibit and facilitate change within the health care organization. Recognizing how one system influences another is a necessary step in moving an EBP assignment forward.

For this week’s Discussion, you examined the macro and micro systems within your practicum organization and how these systems affect your EBP Assignment issue. For this section of Application 4, reflect on your colleagues’ feedback regarding your Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. What new insights did you gain? Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments. How might you modify your strategies for resolving the issue?

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Prepare
 for this week’s section of Application 4 as follows:

Continue (from this week’s Discussion) to refine your desired outcomes and strategies for resolving the issue.

Also continue (from this week’s Discussion) to evaluate how resolving the issue will improve quality and patient safety.

You will integrate this information (not in PowerPoint) into your Application paper.

By Day 7 of Week 10 of Assignment 1: Application 4: Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignments

Application 4 is due. You do not need to submit anything this week. Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments.

NURS 8410 Week 9 Assignment 2: Application 5: Disseminating the EBP Assignment

One of the chief purposes of translating evidence into practice is to advance the field of nursing. Dissemination is a critical step in this process. It is important to disseminate and share the information gained from a translation-of-evidence project to enhance the body of knowledge within the profession, thus furthering the science of nursing. To prepare for this week’s section of Application 5:

Continue (from this week’s Discussion) to:

Analyze the role of the DNP-prepared nurse in scholarship

The full Application 5 is due by 
Day 6
 of week 11.

For this assignment you will prepare a scholarly product that reports the results and implications of your project to designed audience.  The scholarly product for dissemination reports the results and implications of your project to a specified audience. Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments. Your scholarly product may be in the form of a project summary and evaluation report,  poster presentation, program evaluation report, or a media or technology-based deliverable, Your scholarly product must include the following:

Background, Purpose, and Nature of the Project (2 points)

Describe the larger problem or issue you explored in your DNP Project. Identify your practice-focused question. Explain how this problem or issue affects nursing practice and the overall health care system, and describe how your DNP Project explored possible strategies for addressing the problem or issue.

Evidence (2 points)

Identify the practice setting and context in which you conducted your project, a summary of the evidence supporting the project, and the process for implementation and evaluation. Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments. 

Presentation of Results (2 points)

Explain the results of your DNP Project and recommendations for change that you made to the organization.

Note:
 Up to 2 points may be deducted for grammar, spelling, and/or APA errors.

This Application is due by 
Day 6
 of 
Week 11.

Practicum

Continue to keep a time log and journal of your practicum experiences. See the Practicum Guidelines located in the Practicum area of the Course Overview page for a complete description of the practicum.

By Day 7 of Week 11 of Assignment 1: Application 4: Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Assignments

Reminder:
 You will submit your time log and a journal entry in Week 11.

Week in Review

This week
, you applied systems theory to the evaluation of quality improvement and safety initiatives.

Next week
, you will determine how the success of the new practice approaches can be evaluated and explore the next steps of translating research evidence into new guidelines for practice and, ultimately, standards of care. Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments.

NURS 8410 Week 9: Identification of Outcomes

“In a large, complex organization…the primary consequences of our actions may well be in the distant future or in a distant, but interrelated, part of a larger system in which we operate. For this reason, we are often puzzled by the underlying causes of current problems within our organizations Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments. We are unable to look at underlying structures or patterns of behavior that may have resulted in less than stellar outcomes” (Zaccagnini & White, 2011, p. 45).

How can the perspective described above be shifted to provide a fuller view of the dynamics in today’s health care organizations? And, in doing so, how could this promote the achievement of positive outcomes related to quality and safety?

In previous courses you have examined systems theory, as well as the interrelationships of various areas within an organization. This week, you revisit these concepts as you assess an issue within an organization—analyzing the system at the macro- and the micro-level. You also identify strategies that can be used to assess the clinical environment and the associated nonclinical units that support the provision of quality Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments. In addition, you develop outcomes related to quality and safety.

This week you continue to engage in your practicum experience and on Application 4.

Reference: Zaccagnini, M. E., & White, K. W. (2011). 
The doctor of nursing ractice essentials: A new model for advanced practice nursing
. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments Learning Objectives

Students will:

Apply systems theory to the evaluation of quality improvement and patient safety initiatives

Photo Credit: [Blend Images – Jose Luis Pelaez Inc]/[Brand X Pictures]/Getty Images

Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments Learning Resources

Note:
 To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the 
Course Materials
 section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Brooks, P., Spillane, J.J., Dick, K., & Stuart-Shor, E. (2014). Developing a strategy to identify and treat older patients with postoperative delirium. 
AORN Journal
, 99(2), 256-276.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Jarden, R.J. & Sutton, L.J. (2014). A practice change initiative to improve the provision of enteral nutrition to intensive care patients. 
British Association of Critical Care Nurses
, 20(5), 242-254.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

McCluskey, A. & Middleton, S. (2010). Delivering an evidence-based outdoor journey intervention to people with stroke: Barriers and enablers experienced by community rehabilitation teams. BMC Health Services Research, 10(18). doi: 10.1186/1472-6962-10-18. Retrieved from https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6963-10-18 Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments

Murfet, G.O., Allen, P., & Hingston, T.J. (2014). Maternal and neonatal health outcomes following the implementation of an innovative model of nursepractitioner-led care for diabetes in pregnancy. 
Journal of Advanced Nursing
, 70(5), 1150-1163.

Note:
You will access this article from the Walden Library databases Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Essay Assignments.

NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment

Application 1: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Assignment

In many of the courses in the DNP program, you have been asked to analyze research literature when exploring issues in health care. Reflect now on an issue in your practice area that has different outcomes from what is supported by the literature. For example, the literature evidence notes that nosocomial infections are reduced when procedures such as hand washing, glove use, and isolation strategies are implemented. In your clinical area, you have implemented these strategies and you are not seeing a reduction in nosocomial infections.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

For Application 1, you select an issue that will serve as the launching point for your Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Assignment.

Before you proceed with this assignment, you may wish to review the 
overview of the full EBP Assignment
.

To prepare
 for Application 1:

Consider the specifics of your practicum setting, as well as practice-related challenges in your specialty area that interest you. Brainstorm practice issues in which an outcome is different from what would be expected according to the research literature. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.

Select one issue to focus on for this assignment. This will be your issue for the entire EBP Assignment, so be sure it is one that will enable you to fulfill the project requirements (e.g., you can develop new approaches to practice). You may wish to speak with your Practicum Mentor about your selection.

Explore the research literature on this issue.

To complete Application 1: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Assignment:

In a 1- to 2-page paper, address the following:

Provide a summary of the selected practice issue in which the outcome is different from what would be expected according to the research literature. (
Note:
 The issue you select must be suitable for completing the entire EBP Assignment.)

By Day 7 of Application 1: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Assignment

Application 1 is due.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK2Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.

Click the 
Week 2 Assignment Rubric 
to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.

Click the 
Week 2 Assignment 
link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.

Next, from the Attach File area, click on the 
Browse My Computer
 button. Find the document you saved as “WK2Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click 
Open
.

If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for 
I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database
.

Click on the 
Submit
button to complete your submission. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.

NURS 8410 Week 2: Applying Complex Reasoning Strategies

You likely make countless decisions in your day-to-day practice—many with significant consequences. How do you gather and assess information? Evaluate its significance? Weigh possible actions? As a DNP-prepared nurse, it is essential to engage in self-reflection and further your awareness of how your decision-making processes and use of professional judgment can promote the application of effective practices in your specialty area.

Reasoning strategies guide current practice as well as the development and adoption of new, innovative approaches to improve practice in the specialty areas—a topic that will be explored in depth during upcoming weeks of this course.

This week you begin to develop your small-scale Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Assignment in your practicum setting. In Application 1—the first in a series of assignments in which you will convey your insights and analysis of the EBP Assignment—you are asked to identify an issue related to practice in which an outcome is different from what would be expected according to the research literature. This issue provides the foundation for future development of the project.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

Apply reasoning strategies in a nursing specialty area

Evaluate outcomes in a specialty practice area that differ from the research evidence

Photo Credit: [Science Photo Library – PASIEKA]/[Brand X Pictures]/Getty Images

NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment Learning Resources

Note:
 To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the 
Course Materials
 section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Terry, A. J. (2018). 
Clinical research for the doctor of nursing practice
 (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 1, “The Importance of Research in the Doctor of Nursing Practice Degree”

Read pages 12-18 beginning with “The DNP Graduate With an Aggregate Focus”In this section of Chapter 1, the author explains relationship between the DNP clinician, the research process, and developing an effective evidence-based practice. The author also discusses facilitating change in practice based on critically appraised and validated evidence. In addition, Carper’s four essential patterns of “knowing” in nursing and Rosswurm and Larrabee’s six-phase model for reviewing research are highlighted. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.

Balakas, K., Sparks, L., Steurer, L., & Bryant, T. (2013). An outcome of evidence-based practiced education: Sustained clinical decision-making among bedside nurses. 
Journal of Pediatric Nursing,
 28, 479-485.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Harkanen, M., Voutilainen, A., Turunen, E., & Verhvilainen-Julkunen, K. (2016). Systematic review and meta-analysis of educational interventions designed to improve medication administration skills and safety of registered nurses, 
Nurse Education Today
, 41, 36-43.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Lee, J., Lee, Y., Bae, J., & Seo, M. (2016). Registered nurses clinical skills and reasoning process: A think-aloud study. N
urse Education Today
, 46, 75-80.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Simmons, B. (2010). Clinical reasoning: Concept analysis. 
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66
(5), 1151-1158.

Note:
 You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Application 1: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Project (6 points)

 

To students: 
In addition to the Learning Resources and facilitated discussions provided each week, you are expected to integrate articles from peer-reviewed journals to inform and support your positions and conclusions in the Application Assignments. Graduate-level scholarship provides the foundation for your work and requires a higher level of evidence than lay references, such as the dictionary, Wikipedia, general Internet sites, nursing newspapers, expert opinion, and the like. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.

In a 1- to 2-page paper, address the following:

Provide a summary of the selected practice issue in which the outcome is different from what would be expected according to the research literature. (
Note:
 The issue you select must be suitable for completing the entire EBP Project.) (6 pts)

Note:
 Up to 2 points may be deducted for grammar, spelling, and/or APA errors.

This Application is due by 
Day 7
 of 
Week 2
.

Assignment: Application 2: Laying the Foundation for New Approaches to Practice

This week you have been exploring the interrelationship between theory, knowledge, and research and evidence-based practice. As you begin Application 2, which builds on the work completed for Application 1, consider how evidence-based approaches based on theories from disciplines other than nursing could be used to guide your EBP Assignment.

To prepare
:

Using the Walden Library and other scholarly resources, locate evidence-based practice approaches based on theories from disciplines other than nursing.

Evaluate various approaches and determine if one could be used to support your EBP Assignment.

You will incorporate this information into Application 2 as you continue to develop it next week.

By Day 7 of Week 5

Application 2 is due.

Practicum

Continue to keep a time log and journal of your practicum experiences. See the Practicum Guidelines located in the Practicum area of the Course Overview page for a complete description of the practicum. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.

By Day 7 of Week 7

Reminder:
 You will submit your time log and a journal entry in Week 7.

Week in Review

This week
, you evaluated evidence-based approaches on theories from non-nursing disciplines and research designs that address specific issues in a specialty area.

Next week
, you will examine evidence-based practice models and frameworks that assist with the adoption of new practice approaches. NURS 8100: Identification of a Practice Issue for the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Essay Assignment.