Discussion: Developing a Culture of Evidence-Based Practice
Discussion Week 8 – NURS 6052
Discussion Week 8 – NURS 6052
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 (See below references and attached PDF documents) 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.
Instructions:
1. Post at least two dissemination strategies you would be most inclined to use and explain why.
2. Explain which dissemination strategies you would be least inclined to use and explain why.
3. Identify at least two barriers you might encounter when using the dissemination strategies you are most inclined to use.
4. Be specific and provide examples.
5. Explain how you might overcome the barriers you identified.
** At least 3 References**
Resources from School – References (attached documents)
Gallagher-Ford, Lynn MSN, RN, NE-BC; Fineout-Overholt, Ellen PhD, RN, FNAP, FAAN; Melnyk, Bernadette Mazurek PhD, RN, CPNP/PMHNP, FNAP, FAAN; Stillwell, Susan B. DNP, RN, CNE Evidence-Based Practice, Step by Step: Implementing an Evidence-Based Practice Change, AJN, American Journal of Nursing: March 2011 – Volume 111 – Issue 3 – p 54-60 doi: 10.1097/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000395243.14347.7e
Newhouse, R. P. , Dearholt, S. , Poe, S. , Pugh, L. C. & White, K. M. (2007). Organizational Change Strategies for Evidence-Based Practice. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 37(12), 552-557. doi: 10.1097/01.NNA.0000302384.91366.8f.
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.
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. AJN, American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57-60. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Choy, K. (2017). A Test of the ARCC (c) Model Improves Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice, Healthcare Culture, and Patient Outcomes. WORLDVIEWS ON EVIDENCE-BASED NURSING, 14(1), 5–9. /orders/doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1111/wvn.12188
INSTRUCTIONS: Respond to your colleague by offering additional ideas to overcome the barriers to strategies suggested by your colleagues and/or by offering additional ideas to facilitate dissemination.
**At least 2 references per reply, and they need to support information in the reply**
Main Post – Donique McClinton
Top of Form
Main Post
Dr. Frazer and Classmates
Dissemination Strategy 1 and its Possible Barrier
Agreeing with Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2018), creating awareness and interest should be the first strategy to disseminate evidence-based practice within an organization. To prepare an organization for change, leadership is essential (Newhouse et al., 2007). Leadership must gather their staff and explain that modifications are necessary and required to be utilized.
Spreading awareness and interest can present challenges as many employees may ignore the announcements, advertisements, and newsletters that were utilized. As employees enter the organization, many focus on the task at hand and not the bigger picture. Those employees may only view the attended EBP as “if the job wants us to work a certain way, they will tell us personally.” This way of the employees’ thinking is a barrier to diffusing awareness and interest of EBP.
Dissemination Strategy 2 and its Possible Barrier
According to Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2018), an additional strategy to disseminating EBP can build knowledge and commitment. Conducting a transdisciplinary team training in which leadership and employees learn about the EB and how to accomplish it (Melnyk, 2012) will lead to all staff being in unity.
Along with building knowledge and commitment of the EBP, barriers can emerge. Some colleagues may disagree and disapprove of the need for the new EBP, as many seasoned colleagues are too familiar with how tasks were performed in the “old days.” Those colleagues require further education and explanation, by leadership, on how the EBP can improve topics.
Least Inclined Dissemination Strategy
I believe that the least persuasive strategy can be pursuing integration and sustained usage. Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2018) described this strategy includes celebrations of the local unit’s progression, public acknowledgment, and individualized memos to staff. This comes in the form of the famous repetitive pizza parties given by management, that many staff are appreciative of but wishfully think they deserve more.
This strategy requires improvement to fully grasp the staff’s attention to show the organization’s appreciation properly. Pay-for-performance incentives have placed organizations under pressure to increase their level of care and avoid sentinel incidents (Melnyk, 2012), which may be a more persuasive strategy than a nutriment incentive.
References
Melnyk, B. M. (2012). Achieving a high-reliability organization through implementation of the ARCC model for systemwide sustainability of the evidence-based practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 127-135. Doi: 10.1097/NAQ.0b013e318249fb6a
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice(4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
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.0000302384.8f
INSTRUCTIONS: Respond to your colleague by offering additional ideas to overcome the barriers to strategies suggested by your colleagues and/or by offering additional ideas to facilitate dissemination.
**At least 2 references per reply, and they need to support information in the reply**
Ethel Uzoma
RE: Discussion – Week 9 Main post
Top of Form
Evidence-Based Decision Making
Dissemination is the act of sharing and distributing information through different materials to a specific audience to increase their reach for evidence and effectively use evidence-based literature. It occurs through various channels, social contexts, and settings spreading knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP) interventions on a wide scale within or across practice settings.
Dissemination Strategies I would be most inclined to use and why
I would be most bent on using passive and active dissemination strategies. Passive strategies include sending mass emails and information publications or posting details about evidence to a website and scientific publications in a searchable database for an untargeted audience (Vedel et al., 2018). The approach is less costly in terms of translating knowledge and is highly feasible. In contrast, active dissemination strategies comprise efforts that spread knowledge to a targeted group through practical guidance, prompts, and information media campaigns (Melnyk et al., 2011). I would use active dissemination to increase the reach of motivation and people’s ability to apply and use evidence. Both strategies would be effective in ensuring widespread EBP use on various clinical practices and interventions.
Dissemination Strategies I would be least inclined to use and why
The dissemination strategy that I would be least inclined to use is passive because it involves untargeted information dissemination. Here, the message is untailored, and the delivery is unplanned or uncontrolled. Hence, it is generally ineffective and only results in minimal practice changes.
Two Barriers I might Encounter when using the Dissemination Strategies, I am most inclined to use.
I would be most inclined to use active dissemination because it involves communicating facts actively by targeting a specific audience. Lack of EBP knowledge and fear of the unknown is the most critical barrier in using the approach, making it hard to convince colleagues to come on board and understand the process (Brownson et al., 2018).
How I might Overcome the Barriers I identified
To overcome this barrier, it is critical for the strategy to include resources for learning about EBP, which should be emphasized and taught through nursing schools and selected development centers. Active dissemination is also costly and time-consuming, leading to burnout and stress (Gallagher-Ford et al., 2011). However, this can be overcome by increasing resources and the number of personnel involved in dissemination.
References
Brownson, R. C., Eyler, A. A., Harris, J. K., Moore, J. B., & Tabak, R. G. (2018). Getting the word out: New approaches for disseminating public health science. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 24(2), 102–111. /orders/doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000673
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. The American Journal of Nursing, 111(3), 54–60. /orders/doi.org/10.1097/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000395243.14347.7e
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. The American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. /orders/doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e
Vedel, I., Le Berre, M., Sourial, N., Arsenault-Lapierre, G., Bergman, H., & Lapointe, L. (2018). Shedding light on conditions for the successful passive dissemination of recommendations in primary care: A mixed methods study. Implementation Science, 13(1), 1–12. /orders/doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0822-x
A Test of the ARCC Model Improves Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice
Original Article
A Test of the ARCC C© Model Improves Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice, Healthcare Culture, and Patient Outcomes Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk, RN, PhD, CPNP/PMHNP, FAANP, FNAP, FAAN • Ellen Fineout-Overholt, RN, PhD, FNAP, FAAN • Martha Giggleman, RN, DNP, NEA-BC • Katie Choy, RN, DNP, CNS, NEA-BC
Keywords
ARCC, evidence-based
practice, organizational
culture, patient outcomes
ABSTRACT Background: Although several models of evidence-based practice (EBP) exist, there is a paucity of studies that have been conducted to evaluate their implementation in healthcare settings.
Aim: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the Advancing Research and Clinical practice through close Collaboration (ARCC) Model on organizational culture, clinicians’ EBP beliefs and EBP implementation, and patient outcomes at one healthcare system in the western United States.
Design: A pre-test, post-test longitudinal pre-experimental study was conducted with follow-up immediately following full implementation of the ARCC Model.
Setting and Sample: The study was conducted at a 341-bed acute care hospital in the western region of the United States. The sample consisted of 58 interprofessional healthcare professionals.
Methods: The ARCC Model was implemented in a sequential format over 12 months with the key strategy of preparing a critical mass of EBP mentors for the healthcare system. Healthcare professionals’ EBP beliefs, EBP implementation, and organizational culture were measured with valid and reliable instruments. Patient outcomes were collected in aggregate from the hospital’s medical records.
Results: Findings indicated significant increases in clinicians’ EBP beliefs and EBP implementation along with positive movement toward an organizational EBP culture. Study findings also indicated substantial improvements in several patient outcomes.
Linking Evidence to Action: Implementation of the ARCC Model in healthcare systems can en- hance clinicians’ beliefs and implementation of evidence-based care, improve patient outcomes, and move organizational culture toward EBP.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND It is well known that evidence-based practice (EBP) improves healthcare quality, safety, and patient outcomes as well as fos- ters clinicians’ active engagement in their practices. Nurses who use an evidence-based approach to care and practice in cultures that support EBP are more empowered as they are able to make a difference in the care of their patients. Although the positive impact of EBP has been demonstrated through multiple studies, major barriers exist that prevent EBP from becoming the standard of care throughout the world. These barriers include (a) inadequate EBP knowledge and skills of clinicians, (b) misperceptions that EBP takes too much time, (c) organizational culture and politics, (d) lack of support from nurse leaders and managers, and (e) inadequate resources and investment in EBP (Jun, Kovner, & Stimpfel, 2016; Melnyk et al., 2016; Melnyk, Fineout-Overholt, Gallagher-Ford, & Ka-
plan, 2012). Aside from equipping clinicians with the knowl- edge and skills needed to attain the EBP competencies and con- sistently implement evidence-based care, findings from studies have indicated that clinician access to EBP mentors can play a key role in their implementation of EBP and the development of organizational cultures that support the delivery of evidence- based care (Fineout-Overholt & Melnyk, 2015; Melnyk, 2007).
Although several EBP models exist, most are process mod- els that outline the steps of EBP or the sequence of conducting an EBP project. EBP process models include the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model (Dearholt & Dang, 2012), the Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Quality Care (Titler et al., 2001), the Model for Evidence-Based Practice Change (Rosswurm & Larabee, 1999), and the ACE Star Model of Knowledge Transformation (Stevens, 2012). Unlike EBP process models, the Advancing Research and
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2017; 14:1, 5–9. 5 C© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International
Figure 1. The Advancing Research and Clinical Practice Through Close Collaboration (ARCC) Model.
Clinical practice through close Collaboration (ARCC) Model is a system-wide model to advance and sustain EBP in healthcare systems (see Figure 1). The first step in implementing the ARCC Model is an organizational assessment of the current EBP culture in order to identify strengths and major barriers to EBP in the healthcare system so that strategies can be implemented to remove those barriers. At the core of the ARCC Model is a critical mass of EBP mentors who, through intentional strategic initiatives, assist point of care clinicians in enhancing their beliefs about the value of EBP and their confidence in implementing it. As a result, ARCC contends that heightened EBP beliefs in clinicians result in greater implementation of evidence-based care, which ultimately leads to higher job satisfaction, less staff turnover, and improved patient outcomes. Several studies now support the relationships among key constructs in the ARCC Model (Levin, Fineout-Overholt, Melnyk, Barnes, & Vetter, 2011; Melnyk, 2012; Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2002; Melnyk et al., 2004; Melnyk, Fineout-Overholt, & Mays, 2008; Melnyk, Fineout- Overholt, Giggleman, & Cruz, 2010; Wallen et al., 2010).
AIM The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the ARCC Model on organizational culture, clinicians’ EBP beliefs and EBP implementation, and patient outcomes at one health- care system in the western region of the United States.
DESIGN A pre-test, post-test longitudinal pre-experimental study was conducted with follow-up immediately following full imple- mentation of the ARCC Model. Institutional Review Board ap- proval was obtained from the authors’ institution as well as the organization’s research subject review board.
SETTING AND SAMPLE This study was conducted at Washington Hospital Healthcare System, a 341-bed acute care hospital in the San Francisco bay area. The sample consisted of 58 interprofessional health- care professionals, with complete follow-up data for 45 partic- ipants. Participants were point of care nurses, administrators, nurse managers, clinical nurse specialists, respiratory thera- pists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, dieticians, social workers, and pharmacists. Although physician cham- pions participated in the projects, they were not part of the data collection. Only the project teams participated in data collection.
METHODS The ARCC Model was implemented in a sequential format over 12 months with the key strategy of preparing a critical mass of EBP mentors for the healthcare system. Intensive EBP workshops were first provided to the 58 participants in order to enhance their knowledge and skills in the seven steps of
6 Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2017; 14:1, 5–9. C© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International
Original Article Table 1. Examples of PICOT Questions Formulated by the EBP Teams
� In ventilated intensive care unit patients (P), howdoes early ambulation (I) compared to routinely scheduledambulation (C) affect length of stay andepisodesof ventilator associatedpneumoniawhile in the intensive care unit (T)
� In congestive heart failure patients (P), howdoes comprehensive pre-discharge education (I) compared to standardpre-discharge education (C), affect readmission rates to thehospital (O)?
EBP. In addition, content and skills building in the workshops focused on how to facilitate individual behavior change of clin- icians to implement EBP and how to facilitate an EBP organi- zational culture. The 58 participants were divided into working teams of six to eight members who were to collaborate on an EBP change project to improve patient outcomes within the hospital. Each team was then charged with formulating a PICOT (Patient population, Intervention or Issue of inter- est, Comparison intervention or issue, Outcome, and Time for the intervention to achieve the outcome if relevant) question about an important clinical issue, systematically searching for the best evidence, and critically appraising and synthesizing the evidence culminating in a recommendation for practice. See Table 1 for examples of PICOT questions developed by the teams. Strategic plans were then developed by the inter- professional EBP mentor teams to implement and evaluate the impact of the EBP changes on clinical outcomes within their organization. After implementation and evaluation of the prac- tice changes were completed, the final step for the teams was to submit their projects for presentation at local, regional, or national conferences to disseminate their successes to others within the healthcare community.
OUTCOMES Study variables were measured with the following valid and reli- able instruments. The Evidence-Based Practice Beliefs (EBPB) Scale Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2003a) measured clinicians’ beliefs about EBP and their ability to implement it. The 16-item Likert scale has established face, content, and construct valid- ity with internal consistency reliabilities greater than .85 across multiple studies (Melnyk et al., 2008). Responses on the scale range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Examples of items on the scale include (a) I am clear about the steps in EBP, (b) I am sure that I can implement EBP, and (c) I am sure that evidence-based guidelines can improve care.
The Evidence-Based Practice Implementation (EBPI) Scale measured delivery of evidence-based care (Melnyk & Fineout- Overholt, 2003b). Participants respond to each of the 18 Likert scale items on the EBPI by answering how often in the last eight weeks they have performed certain EBP activities, such as (a) generated a PICOT question about my practice, (b) used evi-
dence to change my clinical practice, (c) evaluated the outcomes of a practice change, and (d) shared the outcome data collected with colleagues. The EBPI has established face, content, and construct validity as well as internal consistency reliabilities greater than .85 across multiple studies (Melnyk et al., 2008).
The Organizational Culture and Readiness Scale for System-Wide Integration of Evidence-Based Practice (OCR- SIEP) measured the organization’s culture and its readiness for system-wide EBP (Fineout-Overholt & Melnyk, 2006). This instrument contains 26 Likert scale items that identify a de- scription of the existing support in the current culture for EBP, which offers insight into the strengths and opportunities for fostering evidence-based care within a healthcare system. The OCRSIEP scale has established face and content validity along with excellent internal consistency reliability of greater than .85 across multiple samples (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2015). Examples of items on the OCRSIEP include the following: (a) To what extent is EBP clearly described as central to the mission and philosophy of your institution? (b) To what extent do you believe that EBP is practiced in your organization? And (c) To what extent is the nursing staff with whom you work committed to EBP?
Patient Outcomes Aggregate data were gathered by the teams, including data from the hospital’s medical records (e.g., number of cases of ventilator associated pneumonia, hospital readmission rates) before and after implementation of the ARCC Model to evaluate relevant patient outcomes as results of the EBP projects.
Analyses T tests and effect sizes were calculated for study variables to evaluate pre-to-post differences. A p value of .05 was set for statistical significance.
RESULTS Findings indicated that the clinicians’ EBP beliefs, EBP im- plementation, and movement of organizational culture toward EBP significantly increased over the 12-month project. Specif- ically, clinicians’ EBP beliefs (n = 45) increased significantly from baseline (M = 60.7, SD = 7.6) to follow-up (M = 64.9, SD = 6.7; t = 4.2; p = .00; effect size = .62, which is a medium to large positive effect for ARCC). EBP implementation also significantly increased from baseline (M = 17.8, SD = 10.3) to follow-up (M = 51.9, SD = 16.8; t = 12.9; p = .00; effect size = 2.3, indicating a large positive effect for ARCC). In addition, organizational culture and readiness for EBP increased signifi- cantly from baseline (M = 80.9; SD = 90.8) to follow-up (M = 90.8; SD = 14.7; t = 3.9; p = .00; effect size = .70, which is a medium to large positive effect for ARCC). In addition, as a result of implementing the ARCC Model, evidence-based interventions improved key patient outcomes (see Table 2).
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2017; 14:1, 5–9. 7 C© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International
A Test of the ARCC C© Model Improves Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice
Table 2. Project Outcomes From Implementation of the EBP Changes
� Apractice change to early ambulation in the ICU led to a2.7 reduction in ventilator days (11.6–8.9) andno ventilator associatedpneumonia.
� With the implementation of apressure ulcer prevention nursing standardizedprocedure onamedical-surgical unit, the acquiredpressure ulcer ratewas significantly decreased from6.07%to0.62%1year later.
� Comprehensive educationof congestive heart failure patients led to a 14.7%reduction in hospital readmissions.
� After implementation of family centered care on the pediatric unit, 75%of parents perceived theoverall quality of care as excellent compared to22%pre-implementation.
� Thepercentageofmothers not supplementing their breast milkwith formula increased from61.7% to71.1%after the evidence-basedbaby friendly hospital initiativewas implemented.
� After implementation of a nurse-initiatedpain protocol in the emergency room(ER),wait time for painmedication decreased from46minutes to 13minutes and length of stay in theERalsodecreased from120minutes to91minutes.
DISCUSSION Findings support the positive impact of implementing the ARCC Model on clinicians’ EBP beliefs and a dramatic in- crease in EBP implementation in those who participated in the project. Organizational culture at the hospital shifted greatly toward system-wide EBP. Most important, as a result of imple- menting ARCC, there were multiple improvements in patient outcomes.
The establishment of a cadre of EBP mentors is cen- tral to building an organizational culture of EBP and im- plementing evidence-based care. The EBP mentors in this study garnered the knowledge and skills needed to successfully implement and evaluate EBP changes within the hospital as well as to work with their colleagues in creating an EBP culture in which to deliver high-quality evidence-based care. These findings affirm that culture eats strategy and assists clini- cians in making EBP the social norm within a system (Mel- nyk, 2016b). Without a culture and environment that supports EBP, high-quality evidence-based care will not sustain (Melnyk, 2016a).
Numerous healthcare systems and hospitals throughout the United States and globe have implemented the ARCC Model in their efforts to build and sustain an EBP culture and environ- ment in their organizations. As a part of building this culture, position descriptions have been created or changed to include responsibilities as an EBP mentor. For example, at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, the primary responsi- bility of the clinical nurse specialists throughout the healthcare system is to serve as EBP mentors for point of care staff in improving patient outcomes. Part of this role is ensuring
compliance with the EBP competencies for advanced practice nurses (Melnyk, Gallagher-Ford, & Fineout-Overholt, 2016; Melnyk, Gallagher-Ford, Long & Fineout-Overholt, 2015).
Research is needed to further confirm the advantages of using particular EBP models in real-world practice settings, including how implementation of these models impact both clinician, leader and patient outcomes (Dang et al., 2015). Com- parative effectiveness studies that evaluate the benefits of in- dividual models as well as combining models also are needed. Those hospitals and systems who use an EBP model to guide implementation of evidence-based care should document their experiences and outcomes in order to better understand the model’s usefulness in facilitating EBP and share this impor- tant information with others who might use the model (Gra- ham, Tetroe, & KT Theories Research Group, 2007). Return on investment by including cost outcomes also should be eval- uated. WVN
LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION
� The ARCC Model is an evidence-based system- wide model for advancing the implementation and sustainability of EBP.
� A key strategy in the ARCC model is the develop- ment of a critical mass of EBP mentors who assist point of care clinicians in the consistent imple- mentation of evidence-based care.
� Use of ARCC EBP mentors enhances the EBP be- liefs and EBP implementation of clinicians and strengthens the EBP culture of an organization.
� An organizational culture of EBP is central to sup- porting sustainable high quality evidence-based care.
� Implementation of the ARCC Model can substan- tially improve patient outcomes.
Author information
Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk, Associate Vice President for Health Promotion, University Chief Wellness Officer, Dean and Professor, College of Nursing, Professor of Pediatrics & Psychiatry, and College of Medicine, The Ohio State Univer- sity, Columbus, Ohio; Ellen Fineout-Overholt, Mary Coulter Dowdy Distinguished Professor of Nursing, College of Nurs- ing & Health Sciences University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, Texas; Martha Giggleman, Healthcare Consultant & Advocate Liver- more, California; Katie Choy, Senior Director, Nursing Practice and Education, Washington Hospital Healthcare System, Fre- mont, California
8 Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2017; 14:1, 5–9. C© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International
Original Article Address correspondence to Dr. Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk,
The Ohio State University, 145 Newton Hall, 1585 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210; Melnyk.15@osu.edu
Accepted 16 September 2016 Copyright C© 2017, Sigma Theta Tau International
References Dang, D., Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Ciliska, D., Di-
Censo, A., Cullen, L., . . . & Stevens, R. K. (2015). Models to guide implementation and sustainability of evidence-based prac- tice. In B. M. Melnyk & E. Fineout-Overholt (Eds.) Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare. A guide to best practice (3rd ed., pp. 274–315). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Dearholt, S. L., & Dang, D. (2012). Johns Hopkins nursing evidence- based practice model and guidelines (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Sigma Theta Tau International.
Fineout-Overholt, E., & Melnyk, B. M. (2015). ARCC evidence- based practice mentors: The key to sustaining evidence-based practice. In B. M. Melnyk & E. Fineout-Overholt (Eds.) Evidence- based practice in nursing & healthcare. A guide to best practice (3rd ed., pp. 376–385). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Fineout-Overholt, E., & Melnyk, B. M. (2006). Organizational cul- ture and readiness scale for system-wide integration of evidence-based practice. Gilbert, AZ: ARCC, llc.
Graham, I. D., & Tetroe, J. & the KT Theories Research Group. (2007). Some theoretical underpinnings of knowledge transla- tion. Academic Emergency Medicine, 14(11), 936–941.
Jun, J., Kovner, C. T., & Stimpfel, A. W. (2016). Barriers and facilitators of nurses’ use of clinical practice guidelines: An integrative review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 60, 54–68.
Levin, R. F., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Barnes, M., & Vetter, M. J. (2011). Fostering evidence-based practice to improve nurse and cost outcomes in a community health setting: A pilot test of the advancing research and clinical practice through close collaboration model. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 35(1), 21– 33.
Melnyk, B. M. (2007). The evidence-based practice mentor: A promising strategy for implementing and sustaining EBP in healthcare systems. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 4(3), 123–125.
Melnyk, B. M. (2012). Achieving a high-reliability organization through implementation of the ARCC model for system wide sustainability of evidence-based practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 127–135.
Melnyk, B. M. (2016a). An urgent call to action for nurse lead- ers to establish sustainable evidence-based practice cultures and implement evidence-based interventions to improve healthcare quality. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 13(1), 3–5.
Melnyk, B. M. (2016b). Culture eats strategy every time: What works in building and sustaining an evidence-based practice cul- ture in healthcare systems. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nurs- ing, 13(2), 99–101.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2002). Putting research into practice. Reflections on Nursing Leadership, 28(2), 22–25.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2003a). Evidence-based prac- tice beliefs scale. Gilbert, AZ: ARCC Publishing.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2003b). Evidence-based prac- tice implementation scale (3rd ed.). Gilbert, AZ: ARCC Publishing.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2015). Evidence-based prac- tice in nursing and healthcare: A guide to best practice. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Fischbeck Feinstein, N., Li, H., Small, L., Wilcox, L., & Kraus, R. (2004). Nurses’ perceived knowledge, beliefs, skills, and needs regarding evidence-based practice: Implications for accelerating the paradigm shift. World- views on Evidence-Based Nursing, 1(3), 185–193.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Kaplan, L. (2012). The state of evidence-based practice in U.S. nurses: Critical implications for nurse leaders and educators. Journal of Nursing Administration, 42(9), 410–417.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Cruz, R. (2010). Correlates among cognitive beliefs, EBP implementa- tion, organizational culture, cohesion and job satisfaction in evidence-based practice mentors from a community hospital system. Nursing Outlook, 58(6), 301–308.
Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2016). Implementing the evidence-based practice competencies in healthcare. A practical guide for improving quality, safety and patient outcomes. Indianapolis, IN: Sigma Theta Tau International.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., & Mays, M. (2008). The evidence-based practice beliefs and implementation scales: Psy- chometric properties of two new instruments. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 5(4), 208–216.
Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher-Ford, L., Thomas, B. K., Troseth, M., Wyngarden, K., & Szalacha, L. (2016). A study of chief nurse executives indicates low prioritization of evidence-based practice and shortcomings in hospital performance metrics across the United States. Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing, 13(1), 6–14.
Rosswurm, M. A., & Larrabee, J. H. (1999). A model for change to evidence-based practice. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 31(4), 317–322.
Stevens, K. R. (2012). Star model of EBP: Knowledge transformation. Academic Center for Evidence-based Practice, TX: The Univer- sity of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.
Titler, M. G., Kleiber, C., Steelman, V. J., Rakel, B. A., Budreau, G., Everett, L. Q., & . . . Goode, C. J. (2001). The Iowa Model of evidence-based practice to promote quality care. Critical Care Nursing Clinics of North America, 13(4), 497–509.
Wallen, G. R., Mitchell, S. A., Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Miller-Davis, C., Yates, J., & Hastings, C. (2010). Implement- ing evidence-based practice: Effectiveness of a structured mul- tifaceted mentorship programme. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(12), 2761–2771.
doi 10.1111/wvn.12188 WVN 2017;14:5–9
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2017; 14:1, 5–9. 9 C© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International
Copyright of Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
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 with your coursework.Do you handle any type of coursework?
Yes. We have posted 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 on “Order Now” on the main Menu 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.
- 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.
SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS – Discussion: Developing a Culture of Evidence-Based Practice
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.
- Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, including a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two-sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
- Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
- APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with the APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
- Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage over-utilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Master’s level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. Discussion: Developing a Culture of Evidence-Based Practice
- LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to Lopes Write, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
- Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is a 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
- Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
- Guarantee
- Zero Plagiarism
- On-time delivery
- A-Grade Papers
- Free Revision
- 24/7 Support
- 100% Confidentiality
- Professional Writers
- Services Offered
- Custom paper writing
- Question and answers
- Essay paper writing
- Editing and proofreading
- Plagiarism removal services
- Multiple answer questions
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