NURS 6050 Walden University Evidence Base in Design Discussion

NURS 6050 Walden University Evidence Base in Design Discussion

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our  Erudite WRITERS:NURS 6050 Walden University Evidence Base in Design Discussion

When politics and medical science intersect, there can be much debate. Sometimes anecdotes or hearsay are misused as evidence to support a particular point. Despite these and other challenges, evidence-based approaches are increasingly used to inform health policy decision-making regarding causes of disease, intervention strategies, and issues impacting society. One example is the introduction of childhood vaccinations and the use of evidence-based arguments surrounding their safety.

In this Discussion, you will identify a recently proposed health policy and share your analysis of the evidence in support of this policy.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Congress website in the Resources and identify one recent (within the past 5 years) proposed health policy.
  • Review the health policy you identified and reflect on the background and development of this health policy.

By Day 3 of Week 7

Post a description of the health policy you selected and a brief background for the problem or issue being addressed. Explain whether you believe there is an evidence base to support the proposed policy and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.

This also comes with two posts that will each need a reply and at least two references, all in APA 7 format. The rubric is attached below; please meet the standards.

NURS 6050 Discussion 1 Health Policy: COVID Research Act of 2020

MAIN QUESTION POST- Health policy is essential in nursing. According to Liao (2019), “policies reflect public opinion as well as evidence-based data” (p.90). The health policy I want to discuss is the COVID Research Act of 2020 or also known as the Computing Opportunities to Vanquish Infectious Diseases Research Act of 2020 (“H.R.6599 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): COVID research Act of 2020,” 2020). This policy is to help address the issue of infectious diseases and how to prepare for them. COVID-19 has taken a toll on the health and economy throughout the world. This policy would create a group to be responsible for dealing with pandemics.  A group to prepare for pandemic outbreaks and to help create strategies to address challenges during a health crisis is essential (“H.R.6599 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): COVID research Act of 2020,” 2020). Using evidence-based research will allow this policy to help prepare for upcoming pandemics.

I believe there is no better time to address this policy than now. The research done by healthcare professionals can help policymakers understand essential information (Hebda, 2019). APRNs and research groups can work together to help address and improve health policies. With COVID-19 being a significant concern, this supports why this policy needs to be addressed. Evidence-based research is required to help create a plan of action for the current and emerging pandemics. Creating a group dedicated to this policy will help the population’s overall health. For example, there is a need for a vaccine for COVID-19. With this policy in place, they could have predicted COVID-19 and prepared a vaccine. Research on the spread and severity could have begun before the COVID-19 pandemic and helped decrease worldwide exposure rates. Strong evidence supports the COVID Research Act of 2020 based on the worldwide pandemic status. Throughout history, pandemics have taken a toll on the country’s health. For example, the Influenza pandemic has led to annual flu shots starting in October (the peak season).  The COVID Research Act of 2020 health policy would benefit healthcare now and in the future.

References

Hebda. T.. (2019). The impact of EHRs, big data, and evidence-informed practice. In J. A. Milstead,  & N. M. Short (Eds.), Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed., pp 133-150). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning

H.R.6599 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): COVID Research Act of 2020. (2020, April 23). Congress.gov | Library of Congress. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6599?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22health+policy%22%5D%7D&s=3&r=86

Liao, C. (2019). Public policy design. In J. A. Milstead,  & N. M. Short (Eds.), Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed., pp 87-99). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning

Discussion 2 ML

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our  Erudite WRITERS:NURS 6050 Walden University Evidence Base in Design Discussion

NURS 6050 Week 7 Discussion Post

I found and reviewed the Sexual Assault Victims Protection Act of 2019 on congress.gov. The summary includes,

“This bill requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to conduct a series of activities relating to sexual assault evidence and treatment. Among other things, HHS must establish a task force to improve forensic evidence collection related to sexual assault, maintain a website with resources and best practices related to the treatment of individuals for sexual assault, and host an annual meeting to address gaps in health care relating to sexual assault. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services must require Medicare-participating hospitals, in their community call plans relating to on-call coverage, to specifically delineate coverage responsibilities with respect to screening and treatment related to sexual assault.”( Congress,2020).

As a nurse in the emergency room, I find that this proposed health policy would be beneficial in the way healthcare teams are required to treat possible sexual assault victims. I know that my hospital in the past did not have any specially trained individuals to conduct the assessment and collection of forensics in these cases. With this being the case, nurses were not comfortable doing this, and things could get missed or mishandled with patients. Policy and procedures have changed for much improvement in this practice now we have SANE nurses who conduct all assessments and collection of forensics. “Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANE) are registered nurses who have completed specialized education and clinical preparation in the medical forensic care of the patient who has experienced sexual assault or abuse. “(International Association of Forensic Nurses,2014-2020). I believe that there is evidence based on the need for the policy and changes in the health care practice from personal experience. For example, I had a pediatric patient in ER that my mother brought in with possible sexual abuse. I do not feel properly trained to conduct this investigation on this child and would not want to say or do the wrong thing during such a sensitive time. At that point, I call the SANE nurse on call that comes in and does everything needed for that patient. Even the provider does not go see the patient before the SANE nurse arrives and collects all information and data. Having policies in place for facilities to provide access to specialty-trained nurses will provide better patient care and less traumatic care.

References

Congress.gov. (2020). H.R.4758 – Sexual Assault Victims Protection Act of 2019. Retrieved on October 11, 2020, from  https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4758/all-info?r=5&s=7

International Association of Forensic Nurses. (2014-2020). Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners. Retrieved on October 11, 2020, from https://www.forensicnurses.org/page/aboutSANE

Click here  to ORDER an A++ paper from our  Erudite WRITERS:NURS 6050 Walden University Evidence Base in Design Discussion

Order a Different One   Get Quote   Urgent Paper

Your assignment woes end here!

Who We Are
We are a professional custom writing website. If you have searched for a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework.

Do you handle any type of coursework?

Yes. We have posted over our previous orders to display our experience. Since we have done this question before, we can also do it for you. To make sure we do it perfectly, please fill out our Order Form. Filling the order form correctly will assist our team in referencing, specifications, and future communication.

Is it hard to Place an Order?

1. Click Order Now and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.

2. Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER INFORMATION” section and the system will calculate your order price/cost.

3. Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.

4. Click “FINAL STEP” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.

100% Reliable Site. Make this your Home of Academic Papers.

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONALS: ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER 

NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Discussion
NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Discussion

 Always Order High-Quality Academic Papers from here 

5. From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it. 

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium.

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Your assignment woes end here!

Main Posting

Excellent 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.

Good 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.

Fair 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.

Poor 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

Excellent 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response

Excellent 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

The response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Good 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

The 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.

The response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Fair 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.

Poor 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

Excellent 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Good 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

The 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.

The response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Fair 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.

The response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Poor 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

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Good 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Fair 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100

 

You cannot copy content of this page