Assignment: Evidence-Based Capstone Project, Part 6: Disseminating Results
Evidence-Based Capstone Project
The dissemination of EBP results serves multiple important roles. Sharing results makes the case for your decisions. It also adds to the body of knowledge, which creates opportunities for future practitioners. By presenting results, you also become an advocate for EBP, creating a culture within your organization or beyond that informs, educates, and promotes the effective use of EBP.
- Review the final PowerPoint presentation you submitted in Module 5, and make any necessary changes based on the feedback you have received and on lessons you have learned throughout the course.
- Consider the best method of disseminating the results of your presentation to an audience.
Create a 5-minute, 5- to 6-slide narrated PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project.
- Be sure to incorporate any feedback or changes from your presentation submission in Module 5.
- Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy.
Evidence-based practice focus on essential elements that can help create a highly integrated environment where it is possible to attain better outcomes. The evidence-based practice focuses on a specific problem where the findings can be compared with other results previously obtained. Dissemination of evidence-based practice findings can be evaluated based on different settings, mainly where the practice will be applied.
The work of evidence-based practice (EBP) is a relentless process that requires practitioners to continuously provide evidence in support of their decision-making process and policy/practice changes. Healthcare workers may use the EBP model to initiate and implement policy changes which will improve patient care.
During the process, practitioners must present their appeals to the lawmakers providing evidence to why should the changes happen. There are several ways of disseminating the evidence. Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt (2018) define dissemination as “the process of distributing or circulating information widely” (p. 752).
Two dissemination strategies that I would be most inclined to use
The best dissemination strategies that I would consider include a unit-level presentation and local dissemination (Harvey & Kitson, 2015). Unit-level dissemination is only successful, especially in ensuring where the issue that has been considered help improving the underlying problem within the unit. Different units with a given setting can have a varied assessment of the operational environment.
This means there is a need to take into consideration the context under which the evidence-based practice. Therefore, ensuring that the engagement is strategic help ensure that based on the results, the intervention that is put in place is unit-based (Brownson et al., 2018). Organizations strive to implement essential aspects of improving their performance. However, evidence-based practice eliminated the uncertainty risk, which is crucial in attaining better outcomes.
Local dissemination entails significant players at the local level, which is a better aspect that helps provide a strong emphasis on institutional development (Hall & Roussel, 2016). However, it is essential to ensure that dissemination of outcomes is done in an environment where there exist resources and technical ability to attain better results.
Skills and knowledge among the population are likely to be a challenge in successfully implementing the developed practice. There is a need to manage the needs of existing stakeholders, which is essential and help in organizational planning as well as service delivery. The implementation of evidence-based practice should focus on creating a profoundly transformed environment where it is easier to implement positive change. Therefore, training is crucial in empowering stakeholders on how to implement evidence-based practice (Brownson et al., 2018).
Least Inclined Dissemination Strategies to be used
The least inclined dissemination strategies to be used in communicating EBP are poster presentations and podium presentations. The poster presentations may not give out enough information, and the presentation may not look engaging and exciting, thereby losing the aim of the presentation. The podium presentation, on the other hand, may encounter poor turnout of participants. There could be poor publicity of the presentation leading to poor attendance.
Barriers to be Encountered and Overcoming These Barriers
The barrier that could be encountered from the unit level presentation is the lack of interest from staff. An example is a resistance from staff when a change is to be implemented that they do not like or want. One way in overcoming this barrier is by getting staff involved in the presentation. For instance, making a member of staff one of the speakers at the presentation.
In that way, they will be very interested in their presentation. The barrier that could be encountered in making use of peer-reviewed journals is the lack of access to the journals. An example are journals that mandates a subscription fee, which often puts off many readers. One way in overcoming this barrier is by giving such journals free access to online readers.
Brownson, R. C., Colditz, G. A., & Proctor, E. K. (Eds.). (2018). Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. Oxford University Press.
Hall, H. R., & Roussel, L. A. (Eds.). (2016). Evidence-based practice. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Harvey, G., & Kitson, A. (2015). Implementing evidence-based practice in healthcare: a facilitation guide. Routledge.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
- Chapter 10, “The Role of Outcomes on Evidence-based Quality Improvement and enhancing and Evaluating Practice Changes” (pp. 293–312)
- Chapter 12, “Leadership Strategies for Creating and Sustaining Evidence-based Practice Organizations” (pp. 328–343)
- Chapter 14, “Models to Guide Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-based Practice” (pp. 378–427)
Part 6: Disseminating Results
Create a 5-minute, 5- to 6-slide narrated PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project:
· Be sure to incorporate any feedback or changes from your presentation submission in Module 5.
· Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy.–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 81 (81%) – 90 (90%) Good 72 (72%) – 80 (80%) Fair 63 (63%) – 71 (71%) Poor 0 (0%) – 62 (62%)
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.–
Levels of Achievement: Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change
My organization has focused on delivery of better healthcare to its clients.
Diversity in healthcare delivery has bee crucial in transforming the healthcare.
The quality of care has been holistic care which is essential in long-term healthcare delivery.
Patient centered care has been important and provide a better patient satisfaction which has been a crucial aspect in improved quality healthcare delivery.
The healthcare organization has been growing with a critical focus on the integration of fundamental technology-based changes which have focused on transforming healthcare setting.
IT due diligence in healthcare concentrates on evaluation of necessary technological changes in healthcare with a focus on the underlying costs, benefits, and risks involved in IT function.
The changes within the healthcare organization have provided a strong emphasis on the need to ensure there is a focus on the wellbeing of quality service delivery.
Delivery of quality healthcare requires a highly integrated environment that help in ensure that there is better delivery of healthcare across different healthcare organizations.
The hospital has been unable to effectively define a strategy to incorporate technology in healthcare with an intention to improve the quality of care.
The integration of technology has ensured that there are new measures in healthcare, which define an improved quality.
The advancing quality of health care is based on technological changes, which are focusing on specific concepts within healthcare.
However, inability to incorporate better healthcare technology within the organization has created a difficult operational environment especially management of patient health information.
Evidence based solutions
According to Mežinska et al. (2015), the most appropriate approach to consider has been to implement a health management system.
The article assert that the system should focus on efficiency in management patient information as well as operations management within the healthcare environment.
Management of healthcare information has become a critical factor which provides a strong consideration on critical processes which help create a reliable system.
Evidence based solutions
The inclusion of health information management systems has integrated vital processes which help identify important concepts which help manage patient information (Williams, 2013).
Electronic health record systems are also able to put in place better patient data protection thus ensuring that patient information does not fall into the wrong hands.
Health information is sensitive information, which can be detrimental to patient wellbeing if exposed (Wei, Lin & Loho-Noya,2013).
Plan for knowledge transfer of this change
A strategic system development will be evaluated with a key focus on the challenges that the organization is currently facing.
The input of healthcare service providers will be effectively considered to ensure that the system meets the minimum requirements.
The systems that are developed within a healthcare environment must focus on the underlying needs and challenges that nursing care provider are facing in their efforts to deliver improved quality of healthcare (Wei, Lin & Loho-Noya,2013).
A transformed healthcare environment with successful technology integration will form the basis of evaluation.
Patient feedback will also be evaluated since it is easy to understand the impact of change.
The article has provided a strong focus on the importance of technology in healthcare.
The article highlights that the integration of technology in healthcare has been to improve patient satisfaction.
Wei, J., Lin, B., & Loho-Noya, M. (2013). Development of an E-Healthcare Information Security Risk Assessment Method. Journal of Database Management, 24(1), 36– 57. https://doi.org/10.4018/jdm.2013010103
Williams, P. A. H. (2013). Information security governance: a risk assessment approach to health information systems protection. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 193, 186–206. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-291-2-186
Mežinska, I., Lapiņa, I., & Mazais, J. (2015). Integrated management systems towards sustainable and socially responsible organisation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 26(5-6), 469-481.
A summary of the critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed articles I previously submitted.
Hallett, N., Huber, J. W., & Dickens, G. L. (2014). Violence prevention in inpatient psychiatric settings: Systematic review of studies about the perceptions of care staff and patients. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(5), 502-514.
Iozzino, L., Ferrari, C., Large, M., Nielssen, O., & De Girolamo, G. (2015). Prevalence and risk factors of violence by acute psychiatric inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 10(6), e0128536.
Kamphuis, J., Dijk, D. J., Spreen, M., & Lancel, M. (2014). The relation between poor sleep, impulsivity and aggression in forensic psychiatric patients. Physiology & behavior, 123, 168-173.
Latalova, K., Kamaradova, D., & Prasko, J. (2014). Violent victimization of adult patients with severe mental illness: a systematic review. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 10, 1925.
Lozzino et al. (2015), management of acute psychiatric patients in wards is a complex process because different factors influence patients. Knowledge of these conditions provides a unique emphasis on changes that need to be made in ensuring that the healthcare services offered to attain the outcomes required.
Hallet et al. (2014), Dealing with mental illness requires a strong structure in place which can focus on creating a profoundly transformed environment for better engagement.
Kamphuis et al. (2014). The underlying changes within the health system define critical processes can help improve the health of inmates
Lataloya et al. (2014), the victimization of mentally ill patients has also been a significant issue, which makes it challenging to adopt better interventions. Victimization is mainly done in a situation where there is no understanding of the diagnosis of an individual and the determination of whether they are suffering from mental illnesses.
What I learnt from completing the evaluation table
The theoretical basis for the study, the design and hoe the study was carried out.
The number and characteristics of the patient and attribute rates.
The dependent and independent variables.
The general finding and recommendation of the research, the general worth of the research, the strengths and limitations of the study.
What are the risk associated with implementation of the suggested practices processed detailed in the researches
What I learnt from completing the levels of evidence table
Experimental, randomized controlled trial (RCT), systematic review RTCs with or without meta-analysis
Quasi-experimental studies, a systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental studies, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysis
Nonexperimental, a systematic review of RCTs, quasi-experimental with/without meta-analysis, a qualitative, qualitative systematic review with/without meta-synthesis
Respected authorities’ opinions, nationally recognized expert committee/consensus panel reports based on scientific evidence
Literature reviews, quality improvement, program evaluation, financial evaluation, case reports, nationally recognized expert(s) opinion based on experiential evidence
What I learnt from completing the outcomes synthesis table
The number and characteristics of patients in each article
The outcome of each article
The key finding of each article
The appraisal and study quality of each article