Fluent Essays

Instructions attached. Needed by 8/18/21 and 10pm. NO LATER. The dissemination of an evidence-based practice project proposal is an important part of the final project. Dissemination of your project to a local association or clinical site/practice informs important stakeholders of evidence-based interventions that can improve clinical practice and ultimately patient outcomes. For this assignment, develop a professional presentation that could be disseminated to a professional group of your peers. Develop a 12-15 slide PowerPoint detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal. Create speaker notes of 100-250 words for each slide. For the presentation of your PowerPoint, use Loom to create a voice-over or a video. Refer to the topic Resources for additional guidance on recording your presentation with Loom. Include an additional slide for the Loom link at the beginning and an additional slide for References at the end. Be sure to consider your personal demeanor and tone during the recorded presentation. Include the following in your presentation: 1. Introduction (include PICOT statement) 2. Organizational Culture and Readiness 3. Problem Statement and Literature Review 4. Change Model, or Framework 5. Implementation Plan 6. Evaluation Plan 7. Conclusion You are required to cite a minimum of six peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to turnitin. Please follow rubric. Rubic_Print_Format Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points NUR-590 NUR-590-O500 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Presentation 120.0 Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00\%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (80.00\%) 3: Satisfactory (88.00\%) 4: Good (92.00\%) 5: Excellent (100.00\%) Comments Points Earned Content 100.0\% Introduction 5.0\% An introduction is not included. The introduction omits key aspects of the PICOT and fundamental aspects of the evidence-based practice project proposal that will be the main talking points and PICOT statement for the presentation. The introduction generally presents the PICOT statement and most of the fundamental aspects of the evidence-based practice project proposal that will be the main talking points and for the presentation. The introduction is adequate. The PICOT statement and the fundamental aspects of the evidence-based practice project proposal that will be the main talking points and PICOT statement for the presentation are discussed. The introduction is succinct, captures the attention of the audience, clearly identifies PICOT statement and the fundamental aspects of the evidence-based practice project proposal that will be the main talking points and for the presentation. Organizational and Cultural Readiness 10.0\% The discussion on the organizational culture and readiness is not included. The discussion on the organizational culture and readiness is incomplete. The organizational culture and readiness are generally discussed and provide insight into some of the challenges faced by the organization. The organizational culture and readiness are adequately discussed and provide the necessary insight into the organization challenges. The organizational culture and readiness are thoroughly discussed and provide insight into the organization challenges. Problem Statement and Literature Review 15.0\% The problem statement is not clearly stated. Research from the literature review is not included. The problem statement outlines the issue. Support from the research from the literature review is inconsistent. The problem statement summarizes the issue and uses evidence-based support from some of the literature review to rationalize and justify the problem. The research from the literature review provides general support overall. The problem describes the issue using evidence-based support from the literature review to rationalize and justify the problem. The research from the literature review is current, relevant, and used to provide adequate rationale and support throughout. The problem statement is consistent throughout the presentation and concisely describes the issue using strong evidence-based support from the literature review to rationalize and justify the problem. The research from the literature review is current, relevant, and used to provide excellent rationale and support throughout. Change Model or Framework 10.0\% The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are not described. The selected model or framework is and its application to the proposed implementation are only partially described. The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are generally described. The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are adequately described. The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are thoroughly described. Implementation Plan 10.0\% The implementation plan is not described. The implementation plan is only partially described. The implementation plan is generally described and provides an overall outline for the various aspects. The implementation plan is adequately described and provides the details for the various aspects. The implementation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Evaluation Plan 10.0\% The evaluation plan is not described. The evaluation plan is only partially described. The evaluation plan is outlined and provides general information for most aspects. The evaluation plan is adequately described and provides key information for the various aspects. The evaluation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Conclusion 5.0\% A conclusion is not presented. The conclusion mentions some aspects of the presentation, but there are some key aspects missing. The conclusion outlines the broad aspects of the presentation. The conclusion summarizes the key points of the presentation in a concise manner. The conclusion is short, clear and summarizes the key points of the presentation in a powerful and memorable way. Research 5.0\% No outside sources were used to support the assignment. Few outside sources were used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent. Research is adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, or timeliness. Research is timely and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. Research is supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive. Addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. Presentation PowerPoint, speaker notes, Loom voice over or video. 10.0\% The submission is incoherent, contains major inconsistencies, is not presented effectively, or is missing a substantial amount of the required elements. The submission is ineffective, contains multiple inconsistencies, or is missing a few of the required elements. The submission contains minor inconsistencies that are not overly distracting. Presentation contains a majority of the required elements. The submission is presented effectively and contains all of the required elements. The submission is presented effectively, and all of the required elements creatively contribute to the presentation of the concepts. Aesthetic Quality 5.0\% Design is cluttered. Materials detract from the content or the purpose of presentation is low quality. Design detracts from purpose. Text and visuals are too simplistic, cluttered, and busy. Little or no creativity or inventiveness is present. Design is fairly clean, with a few exceptions. Materials add to, not detract from the presentation. Materials used were quality products and easy to see or hear. Design is appropriate and integrates a variety of objects, charts, and graphs to amplify the message. Design is clean. Skillful handling of text and visuals creates a distinctive and effective presentation. Overall, effective and functional audio, text, or visuals are evident. Synthesis 5.0\% Synthesis does not successfully integrate ideas to form a cohesive whole. The combination of elements is not logical and/or verifiable. Synthesis integrates ideas inadequately. The combination of elements is not logical. Synthesis integrates ideas but does not adequately form a cohesive whole. Combination of elements at times is confusing. Synthesis integrates ideas to form a cohesive whole. Combination of elements is logical and justified. Synthesis is unique. Synthesis shows careful planning and attention to how disparate elements fit together. The combination of elements is verified. Mechanics of Writing Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use. 5.0\% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Documentation of Sources Citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style. 5.0\% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. Total Weightage 100\% 2 2 PICOT Final Name_________________Daysha Polk____________________ Complete your PICOT using your approved proposed nursing practice problem. If they were approved, you may use the population and intervention developed in your Topic 1 assignment. Include any necessary revisions in this submission. Refer to the Example PICOT below as needed for guidance on how to complete the PICOT. PICOT Question P Population Patients experiencing decreasing satisfaction levels at ED I Intervention Real-time location systems C Comparison Manually entered status updates to track patients O Outcome Decreased rate of Left Without Being Treated (LWBT) and raising revenue collection T Timeframe Six months PICOT Create a complete PICOT statement. ED patients with decreasing levels of satisfaction (P), does the utilization of a real-time location systems (RTLS) in the hospitals ED (I), compared to manually entered status updates to track patients (C), help to decrease the rate of LWBT and to raise revenue collection (O) within 6 months (T)? Problem Statement Create a problem statement for your PICOT. You will use this problem statement throughout your final written paper. The current delays, long waits, leaving without being treated, decreased revenue collection from the ED unit, and reduced patient satisfaction scores have negatively portrayed the hospitals reputation to the public. As a result, the daily patient visits have continued to decrease as people attribute the facility to poor emergency care services delivery. All these complications result from the use of combined data resources and manual entry status updates when tracking patient records. This manual tracking cannot meet the demand for many patients and leads to overcrowding due to and reduced patient flow in the ED. Therefore, there is a need to install an automatic patient tracking system to increase the flow. References Asheim , A., Nilsen, S. M., Carlsen, F., Næss-Pleym, L. E., Uleberg, O., Dale, J., Bache-Wiig Bjørnsen, L. P., & Bjørngaard, J. H. (2019, December 26). The effect of emergency department delays on 30-day mortality in Central Norway. European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31135613/.  Fudge, N., Sadler, E., Fisher, H. R., Maher, J., Wolfe, C. D. A., & McKevitt, C. (n.d.). Optimising Translational Research Opportunities: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Basic and Clinician Scientists Perspectives of Factors Which Enable or Hinder Translational Research. PLOS ONE. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371\%2Fjournal.pone.0160475.  Morrison, L. E., & Joy, J. P. (2016, June 20). Secondary traumatic stress in the emergency department. Wiley Online Library. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jan.13030.  Wand, T., Crawford, C., Bell, N., Murphy, M., White, K., & Wood, E. (2019, April 30). Documenting the pre-implementation phase for a multi-site translational research project to test a new model Emergency Department-based mental health nursing care. International Emergency Nursing. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1755599X19300400?via\%3Dihub.  Wang, H., Kline, J. A., Jackson, B. E., Robinson, R. D., Sullivan, M., Holmes, M., Watson, K. A., Cowden, C. D., Phillips, J. L., Schrader, C. D., Leuck, J. A., & Zenarosa, N. R. (2017, October 5). role of patient perception of crowding in the determination of real-time patient satisfaction at Emergency Department. OUP Academic. https://academic.oup.com/intqhc/article/29/5/722/4158405?login=true.  © 2021. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. © 2021. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. BENCHMARK 1 Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper Daysha Y. Polk NUR 550 Grand Canyon University June 1st, 2021 Evidence-Based Practice Project: PICOT Paper Generally, a high level of patient satisfaction for the clients in the emergency department (ED) is vital, especially at this time when the healthcare system is shifting towards patient-centered care. Prakash (2010) notes that patient satisfaction levels significantly impact on medical malpractice claims, patient retention, and clinical outcomes. That is, it affects quality healthcare’s timely, efficient, and patient-centered delivery, making it both a proxy but a very effective key indicator for measuring the hospitals and doctors’ success. Consequently, supporting the improvements of patient satisfaction levels can positively affect several healthcare organizations’ components, such as preventive possible malpractice lawsuits, securing a positive local reputation, and enhancing patient retention rates. Thus, there is an increased need to develop strategies to improve ED patient’s satisfaction with the provided care services. Increasingly, the use of real-time location systems (RTLS) by hospitals to track patients, instead of relying on the traditional, manually-entered status updates, is increasingly being viewed as a better strategy to decrease the number or rate of Left Without Being Treated (LWBT) patients, and thus, improve ED patient’s satisfaction levels and hospital’s revenue collection (Boulos & Berry, 2012). Thus, the paper will explore whether the utilization of RTLS in the hospital’s ED, compared to manually-entered status updates to tract patients, help decrease the rate of LWBT and to raise revenue collection within 6 months, for ED patients with decreasing satisfaction levels with the provided healthcare services. A wide array of factors is responsible for the decreased rate of satisfaction levels amongst ED patients. The current delays, long waits, leaving without being treated, decreased revenue collection from the ED unit, and reduced patient satisfaction scores have negatively portrayed the hospitals reputation to the public. As a result, the daily patient visits have continued to decrease as people attribute the facility to poor emergency care services delivery. All these complications result from the use of combined data resources and manual entry status updates when tracking patient records. This manual tracking cannot meet the demand for many patients and leads to overcrowding due to and reduced patient flow in the ED. Therefore, there is a need to install an automatic patient tracking system to increase the flow. Patient satisfaction level, especially for hospital’s emergency department (ED) is increasingly becoming a key health quality indicator. Patient satisfaction regards the degree to which patients are happy with their healthcare (Heath, 2016). Patient satisfaction levels is a care quality measure and gives healthcare providers information on the various aspects of health and medicine, such as their care’s effectiveness and their empathy levels. According to Xesfingi & Vozikis (2016), patient satisfaction is a healthcare quality’s measure given that it provides insight into the provider’s success at realizing the patient’s care expectations, and is also a key patients’ perspective behavioral intention’s determinant. While satisfaction has always been an important factor when delivering any form of a service, it has recently gained prominence or primacy within the healthcare space, especially at this time when the healthcare industry is fast shifting towards patient-centered models. According to Vocera’s 2016 ‘Rise of the Chief Experience Officer’ report, about 64\% of the interviewed healthcare professionals stated that their healthcare organizations prioritize patient satisfaction in a similar extent to which they value clinical workflow and patient safety improvements. Increasingly, patients are demanding a larger claim in their healthcare, with the expectation that their healthcare providers will attain a certain service level. Healthcare quality is increasingly becoming a universal issue, making the healthcare industry to undergo rapid transformations. According to Asamrew, Endris and Tadesse (2020), the rapid transformations are primarily driven by the need to realize its patient population’s ever-increasing needs and demands, instead of the traditional professional practice standards-based needs. In their study of a patient’s satisfaction score with a specialize hospital in Ethiopia, the researchers determined that patient-healthcare provider interaction and general facility amenity-related factors explained about 96.4\% of the variability in the net overall satisfaction score. The hospital’s inpatient pharmacy services, the availability of laboratory, radiology and pain management services, and good quality services provided by the hospital physicians positively influenced patient satisfaction scores. Additionally, availability of accommodation rooms, toilet cleanliness, and dietary services had significant association with the patient satisfaction levels. In yet another study, Son and Yom (2017) classifies the factors impacting on ED patient’s satisfaction levels into three interrelated forces, including predisposing characteristics, enabling resources and need. First, the predisposing characteristics include demographic factors (age, sex, marital status and past illness), social structure (education and employment), and belief (subjective health, perceived social class and attitude towards health service - quality and status). Secondly, then enabling resources include family (income and type of health insurance) and community (type of hospital, mode of arrival, time taken, delayed or missed treatment and frequency of visiting the ED). Finally, the need factors include reason for visit and service received. Joe Greskoviak, president and chief operating officer at Press Ganey, categorizes the factors into communication, provider empathy, and care coordination (Heath, 2016). All these points are interrelated and affect each other. Delayed or missed treatments have become a notorious phenomenon in most hospitals. In a recent research by Asheim et al., (2019), it was discovered that the prolonged ED stay was associated with a higher probability of being discharged from the ED without admission to the hospital and that there was no significant difference in hospitalization length for the admitted patients. Thus, the researchers concluded that prolonged ED stay was not associated with increased risk of death. However, many studies have determined that delayed or missed treatments are strongly associated with decreased patient satisfaction levels and reduced revenue for hospitals. Furthermore, ED overcrowding also reduced emergency care quality by prolonged patient total length of stay, increased rate of patients left without being seen, ambulance diversion, decreased patient satisfaction, decreased revenue collection, and etcetera (Wang et al., 2017). According to Wand (2019), the lengthy documentation and assessment processes, timeliness of consultations and delays in decisions about patient disposition in ED can lead to reduced ED patient satisfaction levels and frustrations by ED staff and hospital executives. As noted above, the complications are primarily caused by the hospital’s reliance on combined data resources and manual entry status updates when tracking patients and their records – all of which cannot meet the healthcare service demand for the many patients, leading to reduced patient flow in the ED, overcrowding, and delayed and missed treatments. Technology can significantly help hospitals solve the mentioned complications. Primarily, by installing a RTLS, an automatic patient tracking system in the ED, hospitals can significantly increase the patient flow in their EDs (Drazen & Rhoads, 2011). According to Garie Fallo, the Western Reserve Hospital’s CNO, a technology suite can help improve care efficiency in EDs and boost patient satisfaction scores by 90\% through streamlining the clinical workflow (Heath, 2016). With an automatic patient tracking system, patients would not need to stop at any stage for manual tracking, stipulating that there would be neither delays, prolonged wait times on stretchers, nor family waiting. Rather, the process would appear more satisfied, with a very seamless move to the ED room. Thus, right from their arrival, the patients would have a higher satisfaction with the provided services. The side-effect of the high satisfaction scores, according to a review of various peer-reviewed publications on the importance of patient satisfaction carried out by Prakash (2010), includes improved patient loyalty and retention, reduced vulnerability to price wars or bargains, consistent improvement in revenue and profitability, increased staff morale with reduced staff turnover, reduced risk or malpractice suits and accreditation issues, and increase personal and professional satisfaction. Consequently, by installing the proposed RTLS, hospitals can improve the ED patient’s satisfaction levels. Specifically, RTLS, compared to the manually-entered status updates to tract patients, help decrease the rate of LWBT and to raise revenue collection within 6 months, for ED patients with decreasing satisfaction levels with the provided healthcare services. References Asamrew, N., Endris, A. A., & Tadesse, M. (2020). Level of Patient Satisfaction with Inpatient Services and Its Determinants: A Study of a Specialized Hospital in Ethiopia. (J. Haughton, Ed.) Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2020(Article ID 2473469), 1-12. Asheim, A., Nilsen, S. M., Carlsen, F., Næss-Pleym, L. E., Uleberg, O., Dale, J., et al. (2019, December). The Effect Of Emergency Department Delays On 30-Day Mortality in Central Norway. European Journal of Emergency Medicine, 26(6), 446-452. Boehm, L., & Petty, K. (2016). The Rise of the Healthcare Chief Experience Officer. Vocera’s Experience Innovation Network. Boulos, M. N., & Berry, G. (2012, June 28). Real-Time Locating Systems (RTLS) In Healthcare: A Condensed Primer. International Journal of Health Geographics, 11(25). Drazen, E., & Rhoads, J. (2011, April). Using Tracking Tools to Improve Patient Flow in Hospitals. Retrieved May 30, 2021, from California Health Care Foundation (Online): https://www.chcf.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PDF-UsingPatientTrackingToolsInHospitals.pdf Heath, S. (2016, May 24). Patient Satisfaction and HCAHPS: What It Means for Providers. (Xtelligent Healthcare Media, LLC) Retrieved May 30, 2021, from Patient Engagement HIT (Online): https://patientengagementhit.com/features/patient-satisfaction-and-hcahps-what-it-means-for-providers Prakash, B. (2010). Patient Satisfaction. Journal of Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery, 3(3), 151–155. Son, H., & Yom, Y.-H. (2017). Factors Influencing Satisfaction With Emergency Department Medical Service: Patients’And Their Companions’Perspectives. Japan Journal of Nursing Science, 14, 27–37. Wand, T., Crawford, C., Bell, N., Murphy, M., White, K., & Wood, E. (2019, July). Documenting The Pre-Implementation Phase For A Multi-Site Translational Research Project To Test A New Model Emergency Department-Based Mental Health Nursing Care. International Emergency Nursing, 45, 10-16. Wang, H., Kline, J. A., Jackson, B. A., Robinson, R. D., Sullivan, M., Holmes, M., et al. (2017, October). The Role Of Patient Perception Of Crowding In The Determination Of Real-Time Patient Satisfaction At Emergency Department. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 29(5), 722–727. Xesfingi, S., & Vozikis, A. (2016, March 15). Patient Satisfaction With The Healthcare System: Assessing The Impact Of Socio-Economic And Healthcare Provision Factors. BMC Health Services Research, 16(94).