In ?this assignment, students will be asked to share information about their ?EBP Project (from Module Four) with their peers in the online setting.? ?Students will create a visual aid

In this assignment, students will be asked to share information about their EBP Project (from Module Four) with their peers in the online setting. Students will create a visual aid that describes their evidence based practice project (EBPP) and post it to their group discussion board in Module Five. Students will create a brief written introduction about their EBPP to post with their visual aid. Examples of visual aids may include but are not limited to: powerpoint, brochure, handout, etc.

UTA logo

Please see the Course Schedule for Due Dates.

Overview

This assignment will allow you to share the evidence that you found in the Week 4 Evidence Based Practice Project: Finding the Evidence. You will create a visual aid as described below and share your findings with your peers on the discussion board.

Submitting your assignment

· This assignment will be posted on the DB. The instructor/coach will provide you with feedback and upload your grade to Canvas.

Grading Rubric

Use this rubric to guide your work the assignment. Points are awarded for each section based on content and clarity of expression.

Criteria

Acceptable

Unacceptable

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Visual Aid Content

40.0 to >20.0 pts

Acceptable

Visual aid content: *Pico Question Shared with Audience *Fact(s) from Source #1 *Fact(s) from Source #2 *Fact(s) from Source #3 *Fact(s) from Source #4 *Recommendations for practice/change in practice based on research

Not mentioned or poorly explained

(0-20 points)

Creativity and Professionalism:

· Includes facts from presentation

· Professional and creatively produced

· Includes references

Stated and well explained

(up to 20 points)

Not mentioned or poorly explained

(0 points)

Comments on Two Peer EBP projects:

Two substantive comments

to peers

(20 points)

One or no comments

(0-10 points)

Answers to the two discussion board questions

20.0 to >0.0 pts

Acceptable

Answers are substantive with relevence of course to nursing practice and two concepts to be applied identified

0.0 pts

Unacceptable

One or no answers to discussion board questions or answers are brief with superficial explanations.

Instructions for Completing Your Assignment

· Now that you’ve uploaded your EBP Project from Week 4 into Canvas to be graded, it’s time to do the second half of the project in Week 5.

· You see, it is good for you to have the correct knowledge about something….or to know the right way to practice. However, it is even better if you share your new knowledge with others!

· To prepare for this week, I would like you to do two things.

· Prepare a Visual aid that covers your EBP from Week 4:

· Your PICO question

· What you discovered in your search for information about your PICO question. Make sure to include information from each of your resources (this means at least 4 facts with citations).

· What you would recommend for practice (or as a change in practice) based on your research.

· Be creative and professional with your visual aid for your audience with facts from your presentation. This is a visual aid of your choosing that should be professional in quality and content. You must cite the sources for any illustrations you use. This is done by putting a caption below the image acknowledging the source. Don’t include the sources of images in your reference list. Please make sure you have permission to use the images as well.

· You can create a power point or brochure, for example. Simply typing your information into the discussion board will not meet the criteria for this project, you must provide a creative visual aid with illustrations. Impress your instructor and classmates! Please include your references for your project on your visual aid. Remember your coach and peers must be able to open your submission to view and grade it or comment on it (for example, no .zip files or Keynote Presentations from Apple computers).

· Your instructor/coach will provide you with feedback regarding your presentation in Canvas and post your grade in the gradebook.

image1.jpeg

Finding the Evidence

Student’s Name

Institution’s Name

Course

Course Code

Date

Finding the Evidence

Introduction and Importance of the PICO Question

The PICO(T) question under scrutiny is, "In nurses working in specialized care units, how does the implementation of stress reduction and focused mental care techniques compared to everyday self-care practices affect their overall health and wellbeing outcomes over one year?" This question holds significant importance given the rising concerns about healthcare worker burnout, stress, and the adverse consequences thereof. A study by Søvold and others (2021) revealed that prioritizing the well-being of hospital workers and their mental health is a pressing global public health priority. For instance, the study also revealed that the burnout rate among healthcare professionals has been reported to be as high as 45%, highlighting the need for immediate interventions. The study further elaborated that neglecting healthcare workers' mental health can lead to decreased productivity, increased absenteeism, and more medical errors, thus elevating healthcare costs and impacting patient safety.

Summary of Research Article

The research article by Diehl and others (2021) focuses on the health, burdens, and resources nurses working in general and specialized palliative care in Germany. This study employed a descriptive design, utilizing a convenience sampling method from healthcare institutions across Germany. One of the significant findings is that nurses in specialized units face unique stressors that negatively impact their overall health and well-being. Secondly, the study found that implementing mental healthcare and stress reduction techniques significantly improves physical and mental health indicators. These findings are pertinent to the PICO question as they highlight the specific needs and vulnerabilities of nurses working in specialized care units and the efficacy of targeted mental care interventions.

This article brings invaluable insights into the importance of implementing specialized stress reduction and mental care techniques for nurses, particularly those in specialized care settings. By identifying the specific stressors that these nurses face and by providing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of targeted mental care techniques, the article lays the foundation for evidence-based interventions tailored to this group.

Major Variables

The research study under scrutiny is explicitly concerned with examining the well-being and health of nurses working in general and specialized settings in Germany. The dependent variables in this study are "health and wellbeing outcomes," while the independent factors are "type of care setting" and "stress reduction and focused mental care techniques."

The Dependent Variable: Health and Well-being Outcomes include mental and physical states such as stress, weariness, burnout, and work satisfaction. Operationally, this variable is assessed through various health metrics and self-reported questionnaires, with scales designed to gauge stress, fatigue, and emotional well-being. The level of measurement for this variable can be considered ordinal, as the survey responses are categorized and ordered but do not have a natural zero point.

The Independent Variables are twofold:

Type of Care Setting is conceptually defined as the specific healthcare environment where nurses are employed, which in this study was either a general or specialized palliative care setting. Operationally, this was identified through employment records or self-identification. This variable's measurement level is nominal, as the settings are categorized without an inherent order.

Stress Reduction and Focused Mental Care Techniques are organized and intentional clinical or non-clinical strategies to reduce stress and enhance mental well-being. These could range from mindfulness practices to clinical therapeutic interventions. Operationally, this was assessed by asking nurses to report participation in formal stress reduction or mental wellness programs. The level of measurement is also nominal, given that these techniques are categorized but not inherently ordered.

Strengths and Weaknesses

A strength of Diehl and others (2021) is its meticulous sampling approach. The authors used multi-stage sampling in general and specialized palliative care settings. This increases sample variety and generalizability. By including different care settings, the authors captured a wider spectrum of experiences and stress levels among nursing professionals. This strategic sampling choice is pivotal for studies aiming to make broader inferences about healthcare environments, making it a substantial strength. Contrarily, a discernible weakness in the study can be attributed to the measurement methods, mainly using self-reported questionnaires to gauge health and well-being outcomes. While self-reporting allows for the immediate and first-hand assessment of subjective experiences like stress or fatigue, it is fraught with limitations like social desirability bias, where respondents may underreport or overreport based on perceived social expectations. Self-reported measurements may impair conclusions without standardized and professionally validated scales. Mental health and job happiness are multi-dimensional and complex. Therefore, this is crucial.

The study creates a diversified and generalizable population but undermeasures it through non-standardized self-reported questionnaires. The research's strengths and shortcomings are crucial to assessing its quality and should be addressed when interpreting the findings and their implications for healthcare practices.

Practice Guideline

In the evidence-based practice project, Smets et al. (2018) research on nursing home staff palliative care knowledge was used to create a clinical practice guideline related to the PICO(T) issue and the nurse's role.

Smets, T., Pivodic, L., Piers, R., Pasman, H. R. W., Engels, Y., Szczerbińska, K., … & Van den Block, L. (2018). The palliative care knowledge of nursing home staff: The EU FP7 PACE cross-sectional survey in 322 nursing homes in six European countries. Palliative Medicine, 32(9), 1487-1497. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269216318785295

Three crucial insights from this guideline that pertain to the PICO(T) question and the role of a BSN nurse are:

1. The source highlights the necessity for specialized training in palliative care for nursing staff, corroborating the intervention component in the PICO(T) question concerning the efficacy of specialized training programs.

2. The research by Smets et al. (2018) also emphasizes that enhanced knowledge in palliative care is linked with better patient outcomes, thus resonating with the outcome element of the PICO(T) question.

3. Furthermore, the guideline underscores the role of organizational support in effectively implementing palliative care practices, which aligns with the PICO(T) question’s emphasis on external variables that could influence the effectiveness of the intervention.

The information derived from this guideline underscores the need for targeted interventions and organizational support to enhance palliative care, thus reinforcing the relevance and urgency of the PICO(T) question under scrutiny.

Fourth Resource

Following the evidence-based practice project's requirement to incorporate research from disciplines other than nursing, the following source gives insights on stress management interventions for college students.

Amanvermez, Y., Rahmadiana, M., Karyotaki, E., de Wit, L., Ebert, D. D., Kessler, R. C., & Cuijpers, P. (2020). Stress management interventions for college students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2021-75478-001?doi=1

This source offers valuable insights that are pertinent to the PICO(T) question and nursing practice:

1. Amanvermez and others (2020) examine various stress management interventions and their effectiveness. While the target population is college students, the findings can be extrapolated to healthcare professionals, including nurses, who experience high-stress levels. According to the PICO(T) question, stress reduction practices affect health and well-being.

2. The systematic review examines stress management treatments' effects on mental health and well-being. These insights can be valuable for understanding the potential effects of similar interventions on nurses' overall health and well-being, addressing the core inquiry of the PICO(T) question.

3. The study also examines the methods used to measure the effectiveness of stress management interventions. This information can be relevant when considering how the outcomes of stress reduction techniques are assessed in the context of nursing practice, helping to establish a basis for evaluation within the PICO(T) framework.

Incorporating research from this source provides a broader perspective on stress management interventions, potentially enriching the understanding of their implications for nurses' health and well-being. It contributes multidisciplinary insights that can inform the development of evidence-based practices in nursing.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the research journey conducted in response to the PICO(T) question, "In nurses working in specialized care units, how does the implementation of stress reduction and focused mental care techniques compared to everyday self-care practices affect their overall health and well-being outcomes over one year?" has illuminated significant insights.

From the nursing quantitative research article by Diehl et al. (2021), we gleaned that specialized care units can pose unique challenges to nurses' health and well-being. Their findings underscore the importance of interventions that address these challenges proactively. The significant variables, such as workload, support systems, and self-care practices, were identified as crucial determinants of nurses' well-being. The study highlighted the need for healthcare organizations to recognize these factors and implement strategies to support their nursing staff effectively.

Furthermore, the clinical practice guideline from Smets et al. (2018) directed attention to the knowledge of nursing home staff regarding palliative care. While this guideline does not directly relate to specialized care units, it underscores the significance of ensuring that nursing staff in all settings possess the necessary knowledge and skills to provide optimal care. Implementing educational programs and continuous training can be a practice change recommendation to enhance nurses' competence and confidence, ultimately contributing to their well-being.

Additionally, the systematic review and meta-analysis by Amanvermez et al. (2020) explored stress management interventions. The study focused on college students, but its conclusions affect nurses and other healthcare professionals. Stress management strategies like mindfulness and counselling improve mental health. This underscores the potential benefits of incorporating similar programs into the nursing practice, aiming to alleviate stress and enhance nurses' overall well-being.

In light of these sources, it is recommended that healthcare organizations invest in comprehensive support systems for nurses working in specialized care units. This involves workload management, mental health resource access, and self-care. Continuous education and training can help nurses provide high-quality care while reducing stress.

Nurse health and wellbeing are morally crucial and necessary for a skilled and resilient healthcare staff. The recommended adjustments in practice can help healthcare organizations emphasize nurses' well-being, benefiting both nurses and patient care.

References

Diehl, E., Rieger, S., Letzel, S., Schablon, A., Nienhaus, A., & Dietz, P. (2021). Burdens, resources, health, and wellbeing of nurses working in general and specialized palliative care in Germany – results of a nationwide cross-sectional survey study. BMC Nursing, 20(162), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00687-z

Søvold, L. E., Naslund, J. A., Kousoulis, A. A., Saxena, S., Qoronfleh, M. W., Grobler, C., & Münter, L. (2021). Prioritizing healthcare workers' mental health and wellbeing: an urgent global public health priority. Frontiers in public health, 9, 679397. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.679397/full