ASSESSMENT Brief (specific)

Summative (final) assessment comprises of a 4,000 words (3 parts): 

Part 1 (1,000 words) – historical concepts

Using two examples, critically analyse historical and contemporary approaches to mental health. 

Discuss one example of socio-economic influences on mental health 

Part 2 – Case study (specific) (2,000words)

Select one of the case studies provided Place this in the appendix in your assessment).

· Analyse the case study, and identify a possible diagnosis from the description provided, justifying reasons for selecting the type of mental health problem. Link with available literature. 

· Discuss the possible forms of treatment and intervention and how the person can be supported, taking into considerations the available mental health services in the U.K.. 

· Discuss the implications of this diagnosis for the person concerned, including any potential risks.

· Critically reflect on how current policy and legislation would define best practice to meet the holistic needs of this service user.

Part 3 – Reflection (1,000 words)

Using Gibbs’ Model, reflect on how the case study you have discussed could develop and inform your practice when working and /or caring for individuals with mental health issues. What have you learned from undertaking this case study?

Specific Assessment Criteria:

(Please note that the General Assessment Criteria will also apply. Please see section 15)

Secondary Research Level HE6 – it is expected that your reference list will contain 15-20 relevant sources. As a MINIMUM the reference list should include 3 refereed academic journal articles and 5 academic books.

  

Application 4: Planning for Change, Implementing and Evaluating EBP Projects

Evaluating EBP Projects

Many factors influence how successfully an EBP Project is implemented and evaluated. As noted in this week’s Learning Resources, using a translation framework can facilitate effective implementation and the evaluation of outcomes.

As you complete Application 4, revisit the evidence-based practice model or framework you selected for your EBP Project (Application 2 [see attached file]). How does the model or framework facilitate the evaluation of outcomes? Would another model or framework better meet the needs of your project?

To prepare for this week’s section of Application 4:

• Continue      (from this week’s Discussion[ use the discussion you are currently working on for me]) to:
  • Identify       an appropriate method for evaluating your outcomes.
  • Develop       new practice guidelines based on the possible results of the evaluation.
  • Create,       if appropriate, new standards of care that would be based on the new practice guidelines.

This paper should be written in APA format with a minimum of 8 scholarly references. All level 1 & 2 headers must be as in the grading rubric (see attached file). The paper must also include an introduction ending with a purpose statement and a conclusion as per APA guidelines. Do not go over the required maximum of 8-page. The Paper must be cited often and throughout.

The full Application 4 is due by Wednesday 10/31/18 before midgnight of this week. Instructions for how to prepare for previous sections of this Application have been provided in Weeks 8 and 9 (see attached files on WK8 & WK9 discussions you previously did for me).

To complete: (See attached Grading Rubric)

Write a 4- to 8-page paper that addresses the following:

1) Planning for EBP Change (see attached file on WK8 Discussion)

a) Analyze the impact of implementing change in your practice environment, including the factors that need to be considered regarding stakeholders and end users.

b) Summarize the methods you would use to ensure that those are adequately addressed.

2) Implementing EBP Projects (see attached file on WK9 Discussion)

a) Identify the desired outcomes of your EBP Project.

b) Describe any macro or micro systems issues that may inhibit implementation and strategies for resolving those issues.

c) Explain how resolving your EBP Project issue will improve quality and patient safety.

3) Evaluating EBP Projects (See this week Discussion you are currently working on)

a) Describe evaluation strategies.

b) Formulate new practice guidelines based on the possible results of the evaluation of outcomes.

c) Describe, if appropriate, new standards of care relevant to the new practice guidelines

Required Readings

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terharr, M. F. (2016). Translation of evidence into nursing and health care practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

• Chapter      4, “Translation of Evidence to Improve Clinical Outcomes”
• Chapter      5, “Translation of Evidence for Improving Safety and Quality”
• Chapter      7, “Translation of Evidence for Health Policy” 
• Chapter      17, “Data Management and Evaluation of Translation” 
• Chapter      14, “Creating a Culture That Promotes Translation”
• Chapter      15, “Best Practices in Translation: Challenges and Barriers in      Translation”

Darling, F. (2016). Practitioners’ views and barriers to implementation of the Keeping Birth Normal tool: A pilot study. British Journal of Midwifery, 24(7), 508-519.

Sadeghi-Bazargani, H., Tabrizi, J.S., & Azami-Aghdash, S. (2014). Barriers to evidence-based medicine: a systematic review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 20, 793-802.

Smith, E.L., Rice, K.L., & Agrell-Kann, M. (2015). Improving quality outcomes using a champion model for ancillary nursing staff, Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 46(12), 539-541.

Andermann, A., Pang, T., Newton, J.T., Davis, A., & Panisset, U. (2016). Evidence for health II: Overcoming barriers to using evidence in policy and practice. Health Research Policy and Systems, 14 (17) doi 10.1186/s12961-016-0086-3

Catallo, C. & Sidani, S. The self-assessment for organizational capacity instrument for evidence-informed health policy: Preliminary reliability and validity of an instrument (2014). Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(1), 35–45.

Malterud, K., Bjelland, K., & Elvbakken, K.T. (Evidence-based medicine – an appropriate tool for evidence-based health policy? A case study from Norway. Health Research Policy and Systems, 14 (15) doi 10.1186/s12961-016-0088-1

Rehfuess, E.A., Durao, S., Kyamanywa, P., Meerpohl, J. J., Young, T., & Rohwer, A. (2016). An approach for setting evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities in low- and middle-income countries, Policy & Practice, 94, 297–305 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.162966

Schaffer, M.A., Sandau, K.E., & Diedrick, L. (2013). Evidence-based practice models for organizational change: overview and practical applications. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(5), 1197-1209 (see attached file).

Erickson, K., Monsen, K.A., Artleson, I.S., Radosevich, D.M., Oftedahl, G., Neely, C., & Thorsen, D.R. Translation of obesity practice guidelines: Measurement and evaluation. Public Health Nursing, 12(3), 222–23. doi: 10.1111/phn.12169. (see attached file)

Wang, Y., Xiao, L.D., Ullah, S., Guo-Ping, H., & De Bellis, A. Evaluation of a nurse-led dementia education and knowledge translation programme in primary care: A cluster randomized controlled trial (2017). Nurse Education Today, 49, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.10.016. (see attached file)

Abdullah, G., Rossy, D., Ploeg, J., Davies, B., Higuchi, K., Sikora, L., & Stacey, D. (2014). Measuring the effectiveness of mentoring asa knowledge translation intervention for implementing empirical evidence: A systematic review. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11 (5) 284–300. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1111/wvn.12060 (see attached file)

Einarson, A., Egberts, T.c., & Heerdink, E.R. (2015). Antidepressant use in pregnancy: knowledge transfer and translation of research findings. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 21, 579-583 doi:10.1111/jep.12338 (see attached file)

PIICOT Question

In patients in extended intensive care within an urban acute care facility in Eastern United States, how does early mobilization as recommended by National Institute of Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines on rehabilitation of patients after critical illness impact early transfers from intensive care as measured 6 months post-implementation when compared to the current standard of care including minimal mobilization of patients?

P: Adult patients 

I: in extended intensive care within an urban acute care facility

I: increased mobilization of the patients 

C: minimal mobilization of the patients

O: early transfers of the patients from intensive care

T: 6 months