NURS 6052 Discussion Developing a Culture of EBP
RE: Discussion – Week 9
Evidence-based practice focus on essential elements that can help create a highly integrated environment where it is possible to attain better outcomes. The evidence-based practice focuses on a specific problem where the findings can be compared with other results previously obtained. Dissemination of evidence-based practice findings can be evaluated based on different settings, mainly where the practice will be applied. The work of evidence-based practice (EBP) is a stringent process that requires practitioners to continuously provide evidence in support of their decision-making process and policy/practice changes. Healthcare workers may use the EBP model to initiate and implement policy changes that will improve patient care. During the procedure, practitioners must present their appeals to the lawmakers, providing evidence of why the changes happen. There are several ways of disseminating the evidence. Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt (2018) define dissemination as “the process of distributing or circulating information widely.”
NURS 6052 Discussion Developing a Culture of EBP
Two dissemination strategies that I would be most inclined to use
Local dissemination and presentation at the unit level are two of the most effective dissemination tactics that I would recommend (Harvey & Kitson, 2015). Unit-level dissemination is only effective when the issue has been studied in order to improve the underlying problem inside the unit, which is particularly true in this case. It is possible for different units in a given context to have very different assessments of the operational environment. This implies that it is necessary to take into account the context in which evidence-based practice is implemented. As a result, ensuring that the engagement is strategic helps to guarantee that the intervention that is put in place is unit-based based on the results of the engagement (Brownson et al., 2018). Organizations work hard to put in place critical parts of increasing their overall performance. Evidence-based practice, on the other hand, eliminates the uncertainty risk, which is critical in achieving improved outcomes in healthcare.
Local dissemination comprises key actors at the local level, which is a positive component that contributes to placing a heavy emphasis on institutional development in a more effective manner (Hall & Roussel, 2016). The transmission of outcomes, on the other hand, must take place in an environment where there are sufficient resources and technical capability to achieve better results. The lack of skills and knowledge among the general public is likely to be a barrier to the successful implementation of the created practice. Existing stakeholders’ demands must be managed, which is critical for organizational planning and service delivery since it allows for more effective service delivery and management. It is expected that the introduction of evidence-based practice would result in a fundamentally modified environment that will make it simpler to execute good change. Because of this, training is essential in enabling stakeholders to put evidence-based practices into practice (Brownson et al., 2018).
Dissemination strategies that are least likely to fail will be employed.
Poster presentations and podium presentations are the distribution tactics that are least likely to be employed in the dissemination of EBP information. The poster presentations may not provide enough information, and the display may not be visually appealing and compelling, resulting in the exhibition’s goal not being achieved. It is possible that a modest number of people will attend the podium presentation, on the other hand. It is possible that the event will receive insufficient exposure, resulting in minimal turnout.
Overcoming the Obstacles that will be encountered and overcoming these obstacles
The lack of interest on the part of the personnel could be a stumbling block for the unit-level presentation to be successful. As an illustration, consider employee opposition when a change is being imposed that they do not agree with or want. One method of overcoming this obstacle is to involve the audience in the presentation. For example, they are planning to have a member of the team speak at the exhibition as part of the team. They will be extremely interested in their presentation if they do it this manner. The absence of access to peer-reviewed journals is a potential stumbling block in the use of these publications. For example, periodicals that need a subscription cost, which typically deters many readers, are a good illustration. One method of overcoming this obstacle is to make such journals available to online readers at no charge.
References
Brownson, R. C., Colditz, G. A., & Proctor, E. K. (Eds.). (2018). Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. Oxford University Press.
Hall, H. R., & Roussel, L. A. (Eds.). (2016). Evidence-based practice. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Harvey, G., & Kitson, A. (2015). Implementing evidence-based practice in healthcare: a facilitation guide. Routledge.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 10, “The Role of Outcomes on Evidence-based Quality Improvement and enhancing and Evaluating Practice Changes” (pp. 293-312)
Chapter 12, “Leadership Strategies for Creating and Sustaining Evidence-based Practice Organizations” (pp. 328-343)
Chapter 14, “Models to Guide Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-based Practice” (pp. 378-427) Bottom of Form
Discussion: Developing a Culture of Evidence-Based Practice
As your EBP skills grow, you may be called upon to share your expertise with others. While EBP practice is often conducted with unique outcomes in mind, EBP practitioners who share their results can both add to the general body of knowledge and serve as an advocate for the application of EBP.
In this Discussion, you will explore strategies for disseminating EBP within your organization, community, or industry.
To Prepare:
Review the Resources and reflect on the various strategies presented throughout the course that may be helpful in disseminating effective and widely cited EBP.
This may include: unit-level or organizational-level presentations, poster presentations, and podium presentations at organizational, local, regional, state, and national levels, as well as publication in peer-reviewed journals.
Reflect on which type of dissemination strategy you might use to communicate EBP.
By Day 3 of Week 9
Post at least two dissemination strategies you would be most inclined to use and explain why. Explain which dissemination strategies you would be least inclined to use and explain why. Identify at least two barriers you might encounter when using the dissemination strategies you are most inclined to use. Be specific and provide examples. Explain how you might overcome the barriers you identified.
By Day 6 of Week 9
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by offering additional ideas to overcome the barriers to strategies suggested by your colleagues and/or by offering additional ideas to facilitate dissemination.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 9 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 9
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 9 Discussion
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6052 Discussion Developing a Culture of EBP
Next Module
To go to the next module:
Module 6
Module 5: Evidence-Based Decision Making (Weeks 8-9)
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Evidence-based Decision Making [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Due By Assignment
Week 8, Days 1-7 Read the Learning Resources.
Week 9, Days 1-2 Read the Learning Resources.
Week 9, Day 3 Post your initial Discussion post.
Week 9, Days 4-5 Compose your peer Discussion reponses.
Week 9 Day 6 Post two peer Discussion responses.
Week 9, Day 7 Wrap up Discussion.
Learning Objectives
Evaluate dissemination strategies
Recommend strategies to overcome barriers to dissemination of evidence-based practice changes
Learning Resources
Note: To access this module’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
Required Readings
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 10, “The Role of Outcomes on Evidence-based Quality Improvement and enhancing and Evaluating Practice Changes” (pp. 293–312)
Chapter 12, “Leadership Strategies for Creating and Sustaining Evidence-based Practice Organizations” (pp. 328–343)
Chapter 14, “Models to Guide Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-based Practice” (pp. 378–427)
Gallagher-Ford, L., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Implementing an evidence-based practice change. American Journal of Nursing, 111(3), 54–60. doi:10.1097/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000395243.14347.7e. Retrieved from https://journals.lww.com/ajnonline/Fulltext/2011/03000/Evidence_Based_Practice,_Step_by_Step_.31.aspx
Newhouse, R. P., Dearholt, S., Poe, S., Pugh, L. C., & White, K. M. (2007). Organizational change strategies for evidence-based practice. Journal of Nursing Administration, 37(12), 552–557. doi:0.1097/01.NNA.0000302384.91366.8f
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M. (2012). Achieving a high-reliability organization through implementation of the ARCC model for systemwide sustainability of evidence-based practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 127–135. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0b013e318249fb6a
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Sustaining evidence-based practice through organizational policies and an innovative model. American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Choy, K. (2017). A test of the ARCC© model improves implementation of evidence-based practice, healthcare culture, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(1), 5–9. doi:10.1111/wvn.12188
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Sustaining evidence-based practice through organizational policies and an innovative model. American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6052_Module05_Week09_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Novice Competent Proficient New Column4
Main Posting Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.
Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6052_Module05_Week09_Discussion_Rubric
