MANDATORY TESTING FOR SEPSIS
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT: MANDATORY TESTING FOR SEPSIS 1
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT: MANDATORY TESTING FOR SEPSIS 1
NR505 NP: Advanced Research Methods
Introduction
Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the United States and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, which is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016).
Problem Discussion
Explanation of the selected problem in detail
Research conducted by Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019) shows sespis is a common diagnosis with an overall mortality rate of around 30% and is leading cause of in-hospital death. As some point, a nurse or provider will come into care of a patient with sepsis. Sepsis has several factors that make detection of the illness tricky to uncover. To overcome the faced difficulties in diagnosing. Sepsis needs to be handled through a mandated testing protocol. To ensure that sepsis is not misdiagnosed.
Identify the stakeholders impacted by the concern.
The stakeholder in this quality care improvement problem, sepsis testing range greatly. First hand, patients and their family and friends are burden of the detrimental effects of the illness. Second hand are the employed healthcare workers handling sepsis patients. As mentioned in Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G., 2016 research facilities hospital, urgent care, patients, and healthcare carriers that manage and provide care are on the back end of the cause and effect. The mortality rates and healthcare cost that are associated with the acute illness have a domino effect on healthcare and the governance. The problem is on the micro level, but effects the healthcare facilities and insurance carrier by the increased rates that raise cost, readmissions. Thus adversely affects the organization by reviews and funding.
Identify the consequences/importance of the selected concern; state rationale for selection of the topic.
If the current testing protocols are updated and mandated to include the testing of all critical patients no matter the presents of illness or signs and symptoms. The risk is that the rates of mortality will steadily increase. Which will have the domino effect on health care cost as discussed previously.
Identify a purpose statement (the specific aim) for this EBP proposal.
The Purpose of this paper is to describe the changes needed to provide quality care improvement to sepsis current identification and treatment to lower associated mortality rates.
PICO question and Literature Search Process
Identify the PICO question in correct format with all required elements
Among critical care patients eighteen years an older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I), ultimately decrease the number of deaths related to sepsis (O) as compared no screening (C).
Identify the steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal by including:
The steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal are as followed. Research and review of previous studies guide to understanding topic in depth and the relationship and response of others that reviewed. Hence, the assessment will look at those articles and evaluate whether the topic is even feasible. A comparison of the different findings will enable the audience to identify the appropriate patient outcomes.
The Specific Library Databases Used. In this case, the CINAHL and PubMed databases were used to retrieve the appropriate peer-reviewed sources that sourced required information. The CINAHL and PubMed databases have a wide range of studies. Both databases utilize reliable and peer reviewed provide creditability. The research approach and library databases made it easier to identify the right sources that respond to the PICO question.
The key search terms and phrases used. “Sepsis clinical signs”, “nursing interventions” and “sepsis mortality”. Choosing the right key search terms was a challenge; it involves variety and toggling to get relevant articles. After the appropriate terms were applied, it revealed sources that were fitting to the topic.
The Minor (Additional) Search Terms and Phrases Used. There was a need to utilize other minor search terms to support the key phrases. For instance, “sepsis prevalence AND evidence based practice” and “sespis AND mandatory testing” that were also essential. However, they did not have the appropriate sources that the previous search had provided.
Identify any specialty organization that is relevant to this EBP proposal. A Specialty Organization That Is Relevant to This EBP Proposal. The joint commission a center for transforming healthcare focuses on important quality and safety initiatives. The center vestment in the topic are related to the claims of lives and the cost of care as result of the illness. The claim is that through prevention in control can help the outcomes improve.
Theoretical Framework
Explain the theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal.
The most feasible theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal is the public health nursing model. This model uses assumptions to as consideration to the interventions and methods. The model also applies concept of caring, nursing process, interdisciplinary collaboration, and community partnership. This model is suggested for utilization in research and practice. The model promotes clarification of population focused nursing roles and also could be individualized for a recipient of care while focusing on the community as client.
Describe how the identified theoretical framework is to be applied to this Quality Improvement Project.
The Public Health Nursing Model is the perfect framework for the development of a health policy or protocol because it encourages the participation from all stakeholders in the process of both policy creation and the implementation of it as a mainstream healthcare policy (Utley, Henry, & Smith, 2018).
Appendix
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Question Development Tool
1. What is the problem? |
|
| Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the united states and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). | |
2. Why is the problem important and relevant? What would happen if it were not addressed? |
|
| Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, that is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016). Without the adoption of the screening, the mortality rates would steadily increase from sepsis yearly. | |
3. What is the current practice? |
|
| Currently there are no federal requirements regarding the adoption of sepsis screening. In 2013, New York adopted a protocol for treatment (University of Pittsburgh, 2019) | |
4. How was the problem identified? (Check all that apply) |
|
|
· X Safety and risk-management concerns · X Quality concerns (efficiency, effectiveness, timeliness, equity, patient-centeredness) · Unsatisfactory patient, staff, or organizational outcomes |
· Variations in practice within the setting · Variations in practice compared to community standard · Current practice that has not been validated · Financial concerns |
5. What are the PICO components? |
|
|
P– (patient population/patients of interest): Inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older I– (Intervention): SSC recommended consistent sepsis screen once a day C– (Comparison): routine care /no screening tools O– (Measurable outcome): Number of deaths related to sepsis |
|
6. Initial EBP question ❑ Background ❑ X Foreground |
7. List possible search terms, databases to search, and search strategies. |
|||||
| Sepsis clinical signs, nursing interventions, sepsis mortality, sepsis prevalence and evidence practice | |||||
8. What evidence must be gathered? (Check all that apply) |
|||||
|
· Publications (e.g., EBSCOHost, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase) · X Standards (regulatory, professional, community) · X Guidelines · Organizational data (e.g., QI, financial data, local clinical expertise, patient/family preferences) · Position statements |
|||||
9. Revised EBP question(Revisions in the EBP question may not be evident until after the initial evidence review; the revision can be in the background question or a change from the background to a foreground question) |
|||||
| Among inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I) Decrease number of deaths related to sepsis (C) compared no screening (O)? | |||||
10. Outcome measurement plan |
|||||
|
What will we measure? (structure, process, outcome measure) |
How will we measure it? (metrics are expressed as rate or percent) |
How often will we measure it? (frequency) |
Where will we obtain the data? | Who will collect the data? | To whom will we report the data? |
| Outcome Measure | Death toll count related to sepsis expressed in rate | Monthly for 1 year | Three local hospitals | Supervisors or head nurses of the ICU. | The person conducting the research. |
References
Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G. (2016). A structuration framework for bridging the macro-micro divide in health-care governance. Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 19(4), 790–804. doi:10.1111/hex.12375
Drahnak, D. (2016, July). Evidence-Based Guidelines and Scripting to Support Nurses in Sepsis Recognition, Reporting, and Treatment. CRITICAL CARE NURSE. 25, 4. Retrieved July 28, 2019, from /orders/search-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000352625600025&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019). The ABCCs of sepsis: A framework for understanding the pathophysiology of sepsis. Canadian Journal of Critical Care Nursing, 30(4), 12–21. Retrieved from /orders/chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=/orders/search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=141080922&site=eds-live&scope=site
NIGMS: National Institute of General Medical Sciences. (2018, January). Sepsis. Retrieved from /orders/www.nigms.nih.gov/education/pages/factsheet_sepsis.aspx
The Joint Commission. (2020) Sepsis Introduction. Retrieved from /orders/www.jointcommission.org/en/resources/patient-safety-topics/infection-prevention-and-control/sepsis/
Utley, R. A., Henry, K., & Smith, L. (2018). Frameworks for Advanced Nursing Practice and Research : Philosophies, Theories, Models, and Taxonomies. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Pg. 253.
Quality Improvement: Mandatory Testing for Sepsis
Amber Cajina
Chamberlain College of Nursing
NR505 NP: Advanced Research Methods
Introduction
Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the United States and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, which is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016).
Problem Discussion
Explanation of the selected problem in detail
Research conducted by Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019) shows sespis is a common diagnosis with an overall mortality rate of around 30% and is leading cause of in-hospital death. As some point, a nurse or provider will come into care of a patient with sepsis. Sepsis has several factors that make detection of the illness tricky to uncover. To overcome the faced difficulties in diagnosing. Sepsis needs to be handled through a mandated testing protocol. To ensure that sepsis is not misdiagnosed.
Identify the stakeholders impacted by the concern.
The stakeholder in this quality care improvement problem, sepsis testing range greatly. First hand, patients and their family and friends are burden of the detrimental effects of the illness. Second hand are the employed healthcare workers handling sepsis patients. As mentioned in Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G., 2016 research facilities hospital, urgent care, patients, and healthcare carriers that manage and provide care are on the back end of the cause and effect. The mortality rates and healthcare cost that are associated with the acute illness have a domino effect on healthcare and the governance. The problem is on the micro level, but effects the healthcare facilities and insurance carrier by the increased rates that raise cost, readmissions. Thus adversely affects the organization by reviews and funding.
Identify the consequences/importance of the selected concern; state rationale for selection of the topic.
If the current testing protocols are updated and mandated to include the testing of all critical patients no matter the presents of illness or signs and symptoms. The risk is that the rates of mortality will steadily increase. Which will have the domino effect on health care cost as discussed previously.
Identify a purpose statement (the specific aim) for this EBP proposal.
The Purpose of this paper is to describe the changes needed to provide quality care improvement to sepsis current identification and treatment to lower associated mortality rates.
PICO question and Literature Search Process
Identify the PICO question in correct format with all required elements
Among critical care patients eighteen years an older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I), ultimately decrease the number of deaths related to sepsis (O) as compared no screening (C).
Identify the steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal by including:
The steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal are as followed. Research and review of previous studies guide to understanding topic in depth and the relationship and response of others that reviewed. Hence, the assessment will look at those articles and evaluate whether the topic is even feasible. A comparison of the different findings will enable the audience to identify the appropriate patient outcomes.
The Specific Library Databases Used. In this case, the CINAHL and PubMed databases were used to retrieve the appropriate peer-reviewed sources that sourced required information. The CINAHL and PubMed databases have a wide range of studies. Both databases utilize reliable and peer reviewed provide creditability. The research approach and library databases made it easier to identify the right sources that respond to the PICO question.
The key search terms and phrases used. “Sepsis clinical signs”, “nursing interventions” and “sepsis mortality”. Choosing the right key search terms was a challenge; it involves variety and toggling to get relevant articles. After the appropriate terms were applied, it revealed sources that were fitting to the topic.
The Minor (Additional) Search Terms and Phrases Used. There was a need to utilize other minor search terms to support the key phrases. For instance, “sepsis prevalence AND evidence based practice” and “sespis AND mandatory testing” that were also essential. However, they did not have the appropriate sources that the previous search had provided.
Identify any specialty organization that is relevant to this EBP proposal. A Specialty Organization That Is Relevant to This EBP Proposal. The joint commission a center for transforming healthcare focuses on important quality and safety initiatives. The center vestment in the topic are related to the claims of lives and the cost of care as result of the illness. The claim is that through prevention in control can help the outcomes improve.
Theoretical Framework
Explain the theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal.
The most feasible theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal is the public health nursing model. This model uses assumptions to as consideration to the interventions and methods. The model also applies concept of caring, nursing process, interdisciplinary collaboration, and community partnership. This model is suggested for utilization in research and practice. The model promotes clarification of population focused nursing roles and also could be individualized for a recipient of care while focusing on the community as client.
Describe how the identified theoretical framework is to be applied to this Quality Improvement Project.
The Public Health Nursing Model is the perfect framework for the development of a health policy or protocol because it encourages the participation from all stakeholders in the process of both policy creation and the implementation of it as a mainstream healthcare policy (Utley, Henry, & Smith, 2018).
Appendix
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Question Development Tool
1. What is the problem? |
|
| Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the united states and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). | |
2. Why is the problem important and relevant? What would happen if it were not addressed? |
|
| Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, that is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016). Without the adoption of the screening, the mortality rates would steadily increase from sepsis yearly. | |
3. What is the current practice? |
|
| Currently there are no federal requirements regarding the adoption of sepsis screening. In 2013, New York adopted a protocol for treatment (University of Pittsburgh, 2019) | |
4. How was the problem identified? (Check all that apply) |
|
|
· X Safety and risk-management concerns · X Quality concerns (efficiency, effectiveness, timeliness, equity, patient-centeredness) · Unsatisfactory patient, staff, or organizational outcomes |
· Variations in practice within the setting · Variations in practice compared to community standard · Current practice that has not been validated · Financial concerns |
5. What are the PICO components? |
|
|
P– (patient population/patients of interest): Inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older I– (Intervention): SSC recommended consistent sepsis screen once a day C– (Comparison): routine care /no screening tools O– (Measurable outcome): Number of deaths related to sepsis |
|
6. Initial EBP question ❑ Background ❑ X Foreground |
7. List possible search terms, databases to search, and search strategies. |
|||||
| Sepsis clinical signs, nursing interventions, sepsis mortality, sepsis prevalence and evidence practice | |||||
8. What evidence must be gathered? (Check all that apply) |
|||||
|
· Publications (e.g., EBSCOHost, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase) · X Standards (regulatory, professional, community) · X Guidelines · Organizational data (e.g., QI, financial data, local clinical expertise, patient/family preferences) · Position statements |
|||||
9. Revised EBP question(Revisions in the EBP question may not be evident until after the initial evidence review; the revision can be in the background question or a change from the background to a foreground question) |
|||||
| Among inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I) Decrease number of deaths related to sepsis (C) compared no screening (O)? | |||||
10. Outcome measurement plan |
|||||
|
What will we measure? (structure, process, outcome measure) |
How will we measure it? (metrics are expressed as rate or percent) |
How often will we measure it? (frequency) |
Where will we obtain the data? | Who will collect the data? | To whom will we report the data? |
| Outcome Measure | Death toll count related to sepsis expressed in rate | Monthly for 1 year | Three local hospitals | Supervisors or head nurses of the ICU. | The person conducting the research. |
References
Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G. (2016). A structuration framework for bridging the macro-micro divide in health-care governance. Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 19(4), 790–804. doi:10.1111/hex.12375
Drahnak, D. (2016, July). Evidence-Based Guidelines and Scripting to Support Nurses in Sepsis Recognition, Reporting, and Treatment. CRITICAL CARE NURSE. 25, 4. Retrieved July 28, 2019, from /orders/search-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000352625600025&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019). The ABCCs of sepsis: A framework for understanding the pathophysiology of sepsis. Canadian Journal of Critical Care Nursing, 30(4), 12–21. Retrieved from /orders/chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=/orders/search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=141080922&site=eds-live&scope=site
NIGMS: National Institute of General Medical Sciences. (2018, January). Sepsis. Retrieved from /orders/www.nigms.nih.gov/education/pages/factsheet_sepsis.aspx
The Joint Commission. (2020) Sepsis Introduction. Retrieved from /orders/www.jointcommission.org/en/resources/patient-safety-topics/infection-prevention-and-control/sepsis/
Utley, R. A., Henry, K., & Smith, L. (2018). Frameworks for Advanced Nursing Practice and Research : Philosophies, Theories, Models, and Taxonomies. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Pg. 253.
Quality Improvement: Mandatory Testing for Sepsis
Amber Cajina
Chamberlain College of Nursing
NR505 NP: Advanced Research Methods
Introduction
Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the United States and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, which is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016).
Problem Discussion
Explanation of the selected problem in detail
Research conducted by Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019) shows sespis is a common diagnosis with an overall mortality rate of around 30% and is leading cause of in-hospital death. As some point, a nurse or provider will come into care of a patient with sepsis. Sepsis has several factors that make detection of the illness tricky to uncover. To overcome the faced difficulties in diagnosing. Sepsis needs to be handled through a mandated testing protocol. To ensure that sepsis is not misdiagnosed.
Identify the stakeholders impacted by the concern.
The stakeholder in this quality care improvement problem, sepsis testing range greatly. First hand, patients and their family and friends are burden of the detrimental effects of the illness. Second hand are the employed healthcare workers handling sepsis patients. As mentioned in Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G., 2016 research facilities hospital, urgent care, patients, and healthcare carriers that manage and provide care are on the back end of the cause and effect. The mortality rates and healthcare cost that are associated with the acute illness have a domino effect on healthcare and the governance. The problem is on the micro level, but effects the healthcare facilities and insurance carrier by the increased rates that raise cost, readmissions. Thus adversely affects the organization by reviews and funding.
Identify the consequences/importance of the selected concern; state rationale for selection of the topic.
If the current testing protocols are updated and mandated to include the testing of all critical patients no matter the presents of illness or signs and symptoms. The risk is that the rates of mortality will steadily increase. Which will have the domino effect on health care cost as discussed previously.
Identify a purpose statement (the specific aim) for this EBP proposal.
The Purpose of this paper is to describe the changes needed to provide quality care improvement to sepsis current identification and treatment to lower associated mortality rates.
PICO question and Literature Search Process
Identify the PICO question in correct format with all required elements
Among critical care patients eighteen years an older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I), ultimately decrease the number of deaths related to sepsis (O) as compared no screening (C).
Identify the steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal by including:
The steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal are as followed. Research and review of previous studies guide to understanding topic in depth and the relationship and response of others that reviewed. Hence, the assessment will look at those articles and evaluate whether the topic is even feasible. A comparison of the different findings will enable the audience to identify the appropriate patient outcomes.
The Specific Library Databases Used. In this case, the CINAHL and PubMed databases were used to retrieve the appropriate peer-reviewed sources that sourced required information. The CINAHL and PubMed databases have a wide range of studies. Both databases utilize reliable and peer reviewed provide creditability. The research approach and library databases made it easier to identify the right sources that respond to the PICO question.
The key search terms and phrases used. “Sepsis clinical signs”, “nursing interventions” and “sepsis mortality”. Choosing the right key search terms was a challenge; it involves variety and toggling to get relevant articles. After the appropriate terms were applied, it revealed sources that were fitting to the topic.
The Minor (Additional) Search Terms and Phrases Used. There was a need to utilize other minor search terms to support the key phrases. For instance, “sepsis prevalence AND evidence based practice” and “sespis AND mandatory testing” that were also essential. However, they did not have the appropriate sources that the previous search had provided.
Identify any specialty organization that is relevant to this EBP proposal. A Specialty Organization That Is Relevant to This EBP Proposal. The joint commission a center for transforming healthcare focuses on important quality and safety initiatives. The center vestment in the topic are related to the claims of lives and the cost of care as result of the illness. The claim is that through prevention in control can help the outcomes improve.
Theoretical Framework
Explain the theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal.
The most feasible theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal is the public health nursing model. This model uses assumptions to as consideration to the interventions and methods. The model also applies concept of caring, nursing process, interdisciplinary collaboration, and community partnership. This model is suggested for utilization in research and practice. The model promotes clarification of population focused nursing roles and also could be individualized for a recipient of care while focusing on the community as client.
Describe how the identified theoretical framework is to be applied to this Quality Improvement Project.
The Public Health Nursing Model is the perfect framework for the development of a health policy or protocol because it encourages the participation from all stakeholders in the process of both policy creation and the implementation of it as a mainstream healthcare policy (Utley, Henry, & Smith, 2018).
Appendix
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Question Development Tool
1. What is the problem? |
|
| Screening of sepsis is a safety priority area that requires immediate attention and recognition. There is over one million cases of sepsis every year in the united states and numbers are on the rise. As mentioned in the factsheet published in 2018 by NIGMS, the increasing numbers are in attribute of the higher number of people with chronic illnesses living longer, prevalence of organ transplants and antibiotic-resistance infections. Sepsis has significate clinical markers that makes early detection unpretentious. Bringing awareness to sepsis could lower or possibly halt the increasing 2018 mortality rates of about 35% (Drahnak, 2016, p. 234). | |
2. Why is the problem important and relevant? What would happen if it were not addressed? |
|
| Evidence shows that sepsis screening treatment program adoption by hospital has been associated with nurse’s early detection and improved mortality rates due to faster initiation of antibiotics, that is crucial to survival (Drahnak, 2016). Without the adoption of the screening, the mortality rates would steadily increase from sepsis yearly. | |
3. What is the current practice? |
|
| Currently there are no federal requirements regarding the adoption of sepsis screening. In 2013, New York adopted a protocol for treatment (University of Pittsburgh, 2019) | |
4. How was the problem identified? (Check all that apply) |
|
|
· X Safety and risk-management concerns · X Quality concerns (efficiency, effectiveness, timeliness, equity, patient-centeredness) · Unsatisfactory patient, staff, or organizational outcomes |
· Variations in practice within the setting · Variations in practice compared to community standard · Current practice that has not been validated · Financial concerns |
5. What are the PICO components? |
|
|
P– (patient population/patients of interest): Inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older I– (Intervention): SSC recommended consistent sepsis screen once a day C– (Comparison): routine care /no screening tools O– (Measurable outcome): Number of deaths related to sepsis |
|
6. Initial EBP question ❑ Background ❑ X Foreground |
7. List possible search terms, databases to search, and search strategies. |
|||||
| Sepsis clinical signs, nursing interventions, sepsis mortality, sepsis prevalence and evidence practice | |||||
8. What evidence must be gathered? (Check all that apply) |
|||||
|
· Publications (e.g., EBSCOHost, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase) · X Standards (regulatory, professional, community) · X Guidelines · Organizational data (e.g., QI, financial data, local clinical expertise, patient/family preferences) · Position statements |
|||||
9. Revised EBP question(Revisions in the EBP question may not be evident until after the initial evidence review; the revision can be in the background question or a change from the background to a foreground question) |
|||||
| Among inpatient ICU patients 18+ and older (P), does SSC recommended consistent sepsis screening once a day (I) Decrease number of deaths related to sepsis (C) compared no screening (O)? | |||||
10. Outcome measurement plan |
|||||
|
What will we measure? (structure, process, outcome measure) |
How will we measure it? (metrics are expressed as rate or percent) |
How often will we measure it? (frequency) |
Where will we obtain the data? | Who will collect the data? | To whom will we report the data? |
| Outcome Measure | Death toll count related to sepsis expressed in rate | Monthly for 1 year | Three local hospitals | Supervisors or head nurses of the ICU. | The person conducting the research. |
References
Bodolica, V., Spraggon, M., & Tofan, G. (2016). A structuration framework for bridging the macro-micro divide in health-care governance. Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 19(4), 790–804. doi:10.1111/hex.12375
Drahnak, D. (2016, July). Evidence-Based Guidelines and Scripting to Support Nurses in Sepsis Recognition, Reporting, and Treatment. CRITICAL CARE NURSE. 25, 4. Retrieved July 28, 2019, from /orders/search-ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000352625600025&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ladah, E., House-Kokan, M., & Gillespie, M. (2019). The ABCCs of sepsis: A framework for understanding the pathophysiology of sepsis. Canadian Journal of Critical Care Nursing, 30(4), 12–21. Retrieved from /orders/chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=/orders/search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=141080922&site=eds-live&scope=site
NIGMS: National Institute of General Medical Sciences. (2018, January). Sepsis. Retrieved from /orders/www.nigms.nih.gov/education/pages/factsheet_sepsis.aspx
The Joint Commission. (2020) Sepsis Introduction. Retrieved from /orders/www.jointcommission.org/en/resources/patient-safety-topics/infection-prevention-and-control/sepsis/
Utley, R. A., Henry, K., & Smith, L. (2018). Frameworks for Advanced Nursing Practice and Research : Philosophies, Theories, Models, and Taxonomies. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Pg. 253.
ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS
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?
ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT
1. Click on the “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.
100% Reliable Site. Make this your Home of Academic Papers.
SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS: ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT
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