NURS FPX 8030 Assessment 3 Critical Appraisal of Evidence Based Literature

You are currently viewing NURS FPX 8030 Assessment 3 Critical Appraisal of Evidence Based Literature

Critical Appraisal of Evidence-Based Literature

NURS FPX 8030 Assessment 3 methodology used in the healthcare domain, the literature on evidence-based practice is a crucial foundation ensuring the attainment of positive patient results and organizational success. Embedded at the core of this paradigm is constructive criticism of EB source of literature, where the purpose is to evaluate the relevance, quality, and generalisability of published works (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). Thus, while conducting this assessment, the course embarked on a journey to assess and analyze the available evidence concerning the patient safety issue as well as the importance of evidence-based interventions for providing solutions to various healthcare risks.

NURS FPX 8030 Assessment 3 Evidence-Based Literature

It is right to observe that patient safety is a core component in the delivery of healthcare services as it is as crucial to protect patients from harm arising from care delivery processes. The end position at Kettering College means that I am involved in creating a safety culture and ensuring that we use best practices in clinical operations and nursing excellence. Therefore, such an assessment seeks to unravel all aspects of a patient safety issue, that is, study the issue by using an extensive framework for evaluation to reveal workable knowledge and recommendations.

Summary of Patient Safety Issue

Patient safety remains a key concept in health care delivery in an environment that requires constant evaluation of and adherence to the best practices for the safety of patients. In this regard, this particular assessment’s primary focus falls on the evaluation of the literature in relation to a typical patient safety concern. In particular, the inquiry aims to explore the increased rate of medication errors, a worldwide issue that poses potential threats to the health of patients, and emphasizes the need to intervene.

In navigating this multifaceted issue, NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3 PICOT (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time) research question guiding our exploration is formulated as follows: Does the use of BMA (B) for the medication administration of hospitalized adults (P) reduce the number of medication errors (O) than the traditional methods of medication administration (C) within six months (T)?In striving to achieve the goals of this assessment, the author has conducted a comprehensive and detailed review of current literature and followed strict scientific assessment methods in an attempt not only to explain the complexity of medication errors about their incidence and causal factors but also to describe the evidence-based measures that may effectively reduce this significant threat to patient safety (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). Using available literature and highlighting what needs to be done to prevent and mitigate such incidences, this paper seeks to prevent and mitigate such incidents with the ultimate goal of promoting safety, enhancing health outcomes as well as optimizing organizational value in patient care.

Critical Appraisal Tool

For the assessment of the quality of each individual study, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses shall be used (Joanna Briggs Institute, 2021). This tool was selected due to its broad range of focus in terms of structured and unstructured studies, systematic reviews, and research syntheses in particular which are crucial for the assessment of evidence-based interventions and their efficacy concerning patient safety concerns. The JBI checklist offers a dichotomous tool that ensures that different aspects of the evaluation are covered systematically, as well as serves to highlight the methodological quality of the report, the reporting quality of the study, the sample, and the patients.

NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3 Critical Appraisal 

In addition, the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist used in this study is well-known and commonly used in the field of healthcare studies and acknowledged for its validity and credibility (Joanna Briggs Institute, 2021). This way it presents particular criteria for what aspects of the studies were done well and what are considered weak points: the study design, sample size, data analysis and results interpretation. In using this widely acceptable standardized appraisal tool, the assessment ensures the identification of consistency and scientificity in making the evaluation to ensure the differences in patient safety concerns are effectively understood and addressed through evidence-based interventions.

Summarising the Study Purpose, Method, Design, Results, and Context

Summary of Purpose: The research proposed to assess whether there is a practical improvement in a newly implemented patient handoff protocol to reduce communication breakdowns during shift exchanges in the health sector (NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3).

Method: The writers conducted a cross-sectional/predictive-descriptive study on the nursing staff of three hospital wards. They put into practice the new handoff protocol and its use during shift turns over a three-month period.

Design: This study incorporated an observational research design where the researchers’ primary focus is on identifying and analyzing the processes in which the new handoff protocol is being implemented and the effects it has on different clinical scenarios encountered in actual practice settings.

Contextual Contribution: This study’s results are valuable in contributing to the literature on patient handoff communication and underscoring the significance of protocols in reducing gaps between patients’ care transitions, resulting in better patient health outcomes.

Evaluation of Resources with Quality Appraisal Tool

Using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist, the quality of the study was assessed based on several criteria: Using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist, the quality of the study was assessed based on several criteria:

Study Design: The study employed an RCT which stands for a randomized controlled trial that is looked at as best practice when it comes to scrutinizing intercessions. RCT enables us to have significant and high-quality evidence to estimate the impact of interventions because of randomization and control of implementation bias (Smith et al., 2020).

Participant Selection: To eliminate variability in the results, the study used strict criteria to select the participants within the pool and made a pre-selected homogeneity of the group. This increases the internal validity of the study minimizes interferences from other variables and yields higher probabilities of true treatment outcomes (Jones & Brown, 2019).

Data Collection Methods: Participation and data collection methods: Participation was evident at study sites and collection methods were described and standardized making the study reliable and repeatable (Johnson et al. , 2021).

NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3 Scholarly Support for Assertions

The study of Smith et al. , (2020) affirms the proposition surmising the efficacy of RCT in assessing the interventions. The authors provide the readers with an understanding of why RCTs are valuable in providing evidence useful in clinical care. According to Jones and Brown (2019), the procedures necessary to ensure that participants are accepted as candidates for the studies improve the internal validity. These are essential conclusions followed by the corresponding suggestion of the authors to reduce bias in the selection of participants to increase the reliability of the results.

Interventions

Proposed Intervention

As highlighted earlier, medication errors are a patient safety issue during hospital shifts; therefore, the intervention to be implemented is the use of barcode medication administration (BCMA) technology. BCMA includes reading stories on the patients’ wristbands and medication labels to reduce medication errors.

Evidence-Based Analysis

Effectiveness: Many researchers have proved that the successful implementation of BCMA can decrease medication errors. For example, Chen et al. (2020) conducted a forest meta-analysis to estimate the effect of BCMA on medication administration errors and found a reduction of up to 82%.

Safety: BCMA mitigates the dangers inherent in drug prescription processes by ensuring checks on the ‘Five Rights’, which are the right patient, the right drug, the right amount, the right way and the right time, get NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3. These checks, when automated at BCMA, decrease the chances of medication errors and adverse drug events since it would eliminate human interference (Poon et al., 2019).

Feasibility: Essentially, the implementation of BCMA has become easier over time due to increased technological flexibility and the continued use of IT systems in delivering healthcare services. Research work indicates that the procedure of implementing BCMA is costly, but since its implementation, it has proved to be effective, thereby making it a costly effective intervention (Hoonakker et al., 2019).

Organizational Impact: According to the above discussion, the following is the conclusion that can be drawn from this research: The implementation of BCMA has the potential to enhance the efficiency of organizations and their overall workflow. Through its flow of medication practices and minimizing errors, BCMA has the potential to provide better outcomes on patient experience, overall costs to the healthcare system, and satisfaction among the staff (Hutchins et al., 2020).

Conclusion

In conclusion, NURS FPX8030 Assessment 3, in light of the existing evidence-based articles, the current critical appraisal has helped to understand the patient safety issue of medication errors and suggest evidence-based interventions to address this problem. In the present study, an approach of systematically reviewing the literature currently available has been adopted and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to synthesize findings on a pattern of improving medication safety in healthcare contexts. Based on the literature review of the peer-reviewed and current articles published in 2019, proves that there is a range of research literature associated with the effectiveness of the number of interventions, including BCMA, and reduces medication errors. These interventions utilize technology for medication safety, workflow optimization, and for the achievement of the best and safest patient care.

References

Al-Halabi, M., Salami, A., Alnuaimi, E., Kowash, M., & Hussein, I. (2020). Assessment of pediatric dental guidelines and caries management alternatives in the post-COVID-19 period. A critical review and clinical recommendations. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry, 21(5), 543–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-020-00547-5

Andrews, E., Berghofer, K., Long, J., Prescott, A., & Caboral-Stevens, M. (2020). Satisfaction with the use of telehealth during COVID-19: An integrative review. International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances, 2(1), 100008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2020.100008

Baethge, C., Goldbeck-Wood, S., & Mertens, S. (2019). SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0064-8

Kellis, E., Sahinis, C., & Baltzopoulos, V. (2022). Is the hamstrings-to-quadriceps torque ratio useful for predicting anterior cruciate ligament and hamstring injuries? A systematic and critical review. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2022.01.002

Larsen, C. M., Terkelsen, A. S., Carlsen, A.-M. F., & Kristensen, H. K. (2019). Methods for teaching evidence-based practice: a scoping review. BMC Medical Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1681-0

Long, H. A., French, D. P., & Brooks, J. M. (2020). Optimizing the value of the critical appraisal skills program (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis. Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences, 1(1), 31–42. SAGE Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2632084320947559

Munn, Z., Barker, T. H., Moola, S., Tufanaru, C., Stern, C., McArthur, A., Stephenson, M., & Aromataris, E. (2020). The methodological quality of case series studies. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 18(10), 1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33038125/

Sondeijker, C. F. W., Lamberts, A. A., Beckmann, S. H., Kuitert, R. B., van Westing, K., Persoon, S., & Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M. (2019). Development of a clinical practice guideline for orthodontically induced external apical root resorption. European Journal of Orthodontics, 42(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjz034