Evidence-Based Practice Evaluations
- it’s a good idea to get reviews or evaluations from the people who were a part of your change or were impacted by your change. In what way would you choose to get these reviews or evaluations for future knowledge? How would it impact any future evidence-based practice (EBP) projects you implement?
2(mw). My capstone research project is on opioid dependency and how education and proper management can help combat the opioid crisis; to help combat this, one intervention is to provide proper preoperative teaching to patients on opioids. By providing proper education, patients will understand what effect opioids have on the body, understand when to take the medication, be provided alternative pain relieving methods, proper disposal, and how to get assistance for addiction &/ overdose. By providing patients with proper education prior to surgery, patients will have all available resources and understand so that tolerance does not develop.
One way to evaluate whether my project is to compare patient usage of opioids through summative evaluation. As noted, “A summative evaluation is one that takes place at the end of the evaluation cycle” (Reddy, 2019). The advantages of this are: it can help determine understanding, determined achievement, troubleshoot problem areas, measure performance, and more. In this particular case, analyzing the amount of opioids administered within a 2 month period would be compared to patients who have not received an in depth education session regarding opioids to those who have had. By comparing this data, a general conclusion can be drawn if education makes a difference in opioid usage. Other aspects to look into could be finances, readmission rates, overdose, and patient satisfaction. By looking into this data, conclusions can be drawn which can help determine the effectiveness of change– which in this case is for education to decrease the usage of opioids; with possible research showing that fewer quantities of opioids should be prescribed for postsurgical patients.
3 ( jdp) The trial period for the silver coated catheter will be three months. During this period all standard urinary catheters will be removed from the trial unit and only the new catheter will be in use. The unit chosen had only two reportable cases in the past year, this will be our baseline for measurement. CAUTI is reportable to the National Health Safety Network (NHSN) (“CDC.gov,” n.d.). The CDC provides guidelines and strategies for prevention of CAUTI. Using these guidelines and the NHSN agency for reporting, the hospitals infection control director will receive, document and report any cases of CAUTI and forward any cases to me via in house email.
The MICU will receive education on the new catheter from the representative during an in-service at which time sterile technique and a review of alternatives to catheterization will be reviewed and a champion will be chosen to assist in monitoring insertion technique during the trial period of three months.
We will use the CDC criteria for CAUTI and specific criteria for catheterization will be documented via computer and the author will have access to how many patients and why they were catheterized. The length of stay per patient and time frame for catheter duration will also be available for research purposes.
After discussion with the infection control director, a goal of 20% reduction in cases will be our aim.
apa 514 words