A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
Assignment Details: For the evidence-based problem that you identified in Week 1 for your project, locate two different articles/sources representing two different types of evidence from the following categories: (a) systematic review, (b) national clinical guidelines and/or (c) peer-reviewed quantitative / qualitative studies. For each article/source of evidence: Summarize the article/source in your own words without the use of direct quotes.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
Using the Peterson et al., (2014) article located in Week 2 Resources address the level of evidence (hierarchy). Then discuss the usefulness of the evidence from the article/source in addressing the identified practice problem. Be sure to site evidence in-text and in a final reference page. Describe where your two sources fit into the hierarchy of evidence and explain why. Describe the value of these two sources in better understanding and addressing your evidence-based problem. My PICOT question is: In an acute hospital setting, do rounding tools, addressing basic needs, early classification and environmental checks including assistive devices result in fewer falls when compared to only addressing needs when a patient calls?A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
This paper presents a summary of two articles that discuss the use of rounding tools versus patient calls to reduce falls among hospitalized patients in acute care settings. It also describes the hierarchy of evidence of the identified articles and explains the value of the articles in understanding the EBP problem.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
PICOT Question-In an acute hospital setting, do rounding tools, addressing basic needs, early classification and environmental checks including assistive devices result in fewer falls when compared to only addressing needs when a patient calls?
The article by Fabry (2015) is a quantitative study whose aim was to obtain knowledge on the perceptions and perspectives of nurses in an acute care setting on hourly rounding. The existence of potential difficulties and barriers to the successful implementation of rounding influenced the study. Fabry (2015) distributed a survey to staff who provided direct care in six inpatient units. The researchers conducted a descriptive analysis of each item in the survey and aggregated the participant’s responses (RNs=52, Patient-care assistant=52) based on roger’s theory of diffusion innovation and demographic data. The findings revealed that 25% (RNs=13) often used rounding tools and 23.1% (RNs=12) acknowledged that a paper documentation tool for hourly rounding was a true indication that it was done.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
The article by AHRQ (2020) is a clinical guideline by the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality on how to prevent falls in hospitals. The guideline provides the steps that healthcare organizations should follow to implement change when addressing the issue of falls in hospital settings. It highlights the following: how researchers can manage change, how to select a fall prevention practice, the implementation process, measuring fall rates, and sustaining effective programs for preventing falls (AHRQ, 2020). The guidelines however recommend the use of hourly rounding tools done by a nurse who alternates with a nursing assistant to address the 5P’s.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
Description of Hierarchy of Evidence
The article by Fabry (2015) is a level VI evidence since it presents evidence from a quantitative study where the researchers used a quantitative study design to collect, analyze, and present data and findings. On the other hand, the article by AHRQ (2020) is a level VII evidence as it presents clinical guidelines from an authoritative organization. This is the lowest level of the hierarchy, is retrospective in nature, and has no comparison group. Besides, it only provides outcomes for the intervention group thus has a high potential for bias.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
Value of Sources in Understanding the EBP Problem
The article by Fabry (2015) describes how a healthcare organization can improve performance by improving staff and patient satisfaction scores by preventing falls through hourly rounding. The article also suggests the use of an hourly rounding documentation tool that healthcare organizations can use to ascertain that hourly rounding was done and provides insights to nursing educators and leadership on how to lead and sustain an EBP practice or new initiative. In comparison, the article by (AHRQ, 2020) provides greater insights into the challenges that researchers can witness when they develop, implement, and sustain programs that purpose to prevent falls. Therefore, the article provides immense knowledge on how to negotiate an EBP process successfully.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.
The researcher will use evidence from the level VI quantitative article and level VII clinical guideline provided by the AHRQ to guide the implementation of this EBP. The article by Fabry (2015) will guide how to improve performance by improving staff and patient satisfaction scores in the rounding fall prevention program. On the other hand, the article by (AHRQ, 2020) will provide insights on the most expected challenges during the development, implementation, and evaluation of EBP fall prevention programs.A Comparison of the Health Policy Agendas.