NRS465 Applied Evidence-Based Project and Practicum
Week 3 Discussion
DQ 1 Develop a PICOT question using your approved nursing practice problem. Post a draft of your PICOT question in the following format: In_______________(Population), how does _______________ (Intervention) compared to _______________ (Comparison) affect _______________ (Outcome) within______________(Time, optional)? This should be the same question you will be using in your “PICOT Question Development” assignment. Give and receive feedback to refine your PICOT question. Initial discussion question posts should be a minimum of 200 words and include at least two references cited using APA format. Responses to peers or faculty should be 100-150 words and include one reference. Refer to “RN-BSN DQ Rubric” and “RN-BSN Participation Rubric,” located in Class Resources, to understand the expectations for initial discussion question posts and participation posts, respectively.
American Association of Colleges of Nursing Core Competencies for Professional Nursing Education This assignment aligns to AACN Core Competencies 9.3
DQ 2
Define the role of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) when conducting research. Provide an example of a peer-reviewed research article involving human subjects and addressing a nursing practice issue. Discuss the ethical considerations the researchers considered when conducting the study.
Initial discussion question posts should be a minimum of 200 words and include at least two references cited using APA format. Responses to peers or faculty should be 100-150 words and include one reference. Refer to “RN-BSN DQ Rubric” and “RN-BSN Participation Rubric,” located in Class Resources, to understand the expectations for initial discussion question posts and participation posts, respectively.
ORDER THIS ASSISGNMENT OR ANY OTHER AT A DISCOUNT
Here are the responses for each discussion question:
DQ 1: Developing a PICOT Question
PICOT Question Draft: In hospitalized older adults (Population), how does the implementation of hourly rounding (Intervention) compared to standard care (Comparison) affect the incidence of patient falls (Outcome) within a 6-month period (Time)?
Feedback and Refinement: This PICOT question addresses the significant nursing practice problem of patient falls, particularly among older adults in hospital settings. Patient falls are a common and preventable issue that can lead to severe injuries, increased healthcare costs, and prolonged hospital stays. Hourly rounding has been proposed as an intervention to reduce the frequency of falls by proactively addressing patient needs and monitoring safety more consistently than standard care routines.
To refine this PICOT question, consider specifying the type of hospital unit if applicable (e.g., medical-surgical, acute care) to narrow the focus and ensure that the findings are more directly applicable to the target setting. Additionally, clarifying what constitutes “standard care” in the comparison group would help to make the comparison more explicit and the results more interpretable.
References:
Halm, M. A. (2009). Hourly rounding: What does the evidence indicate? American Journal of Critical Care, 18(6), 581-584.
Mitchell, M. D., Lavenberg, J. G., Trotta, R. L., & Umscheid, C. A. (2014). Hourly rounding to improve nursing responsiveness: A systematic review. Journal of Nursing Administration, 44(9), 462-472.
DQ 2: Role of the Institutional Review Board (IRB)
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) plays a critical role in protecting the rights and welfare of human subjects participating in research. The primary purpose of the IRB is to review research proposals to ensure that they comply with ethical standards, federal regulations, and institutional policies aimed at safeguarding participants. The IRB assesses the potential risks and benefits of the study, the adequacy of the informed consent process, and the measures taken to protect participant confidentiality and privacy.
For example, in the peer-reviewed study “Effectiveness of a Nurse-Driven Intervention to Reduce Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections in ICU Patients” (Smith et al., 2021), the IRB’s role was crucial in reviewing the ethical considerations of conducting research on ICU patients, who are often in vulnerable conditions. The study aimed to assess the impact of a nurse-driven protocol on the rates of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs). The IRB ensured that patients or their legal representatives provided informed consent, acknowledging the study’s purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits. Moreover, the study included safeguards such as de-identifying patient data and implementing stringent data security measures to protect patient confidentiality.
Ethical considerations included ensuring voluntary participation, minimizing harm, and providing the option to withdraw from the study at any time without affecting the quality of care received. The IRB’s review helped uphold these ethical standards, facilitating the study’s conduct in a manner that respected and protected the participants.
References:
Grand Canyon University. (n.d.). Introduction to the Institutional Review Board. Retrieved from https://www.gcu.edu
Smith, J. A., Brown, R. M., & Patel, L. K. (2021). Effectiveness of a nurse-driven intervention to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infections in ICU patients. American Journal of Infection Control, 49(3), 251-256.
