NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper

Literature Evaluation Table

Criteria	Article 1	Article 2	Article 3	Article 4
Author, Journal	Schwartz, S., Frankel, A.,	Cho, S. Y., Chung, D.	Bundy, D. G.,	Zavotsky, K.
(Peer-	Rehder, K., Leonard, M.,	R., Ryu, J. G., Choi, J.	Gaur, A. H.,	E.,
Reviewed), and	Frankel, T., Watson, S.,	R., Ahn, N., Kim, S.	Billett, A. L., He,	Malast, T.,
Permalink or	and Sexton, J.	and Song, J. H.	B., Colantuoni, E.	Festus, O. and
Working Link	https://journals.lww.com/c	https://www.ncbi.nlm.	A., and Miller, M.	Riskie, V.
to Access	cmjournal/Citation/2016/1	nih.gov/pubmed/2833	R.	https://www.nc
Article	2001/1255 CENTRAL	3762	https://www.ncbi.n	bi.nlm.nih.gov/
	_LINE_ASSOCIATED_B		lm.nih.gov/pubme	pubmed/26583
	LOODSTREAM.1214.asp		d/25404721	628
	x
Article Title and Year Published	Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection Rates Associated with ICU Teamwork Climate. Critical Care Medicine. 2016	Impact on Targeted Interventions on Trends in Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection: A Single- Centre Experience from the Republic of Korea. Critical Care Medicine.	Preventing CLABSIs among pediatric hematology/oncol ogy inpatients: national collaborative results. Pediatrics. 2014	Reducing Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infections on Oncology. Units using peer review. 2015
		2017
Research	Qualitative study. The	Qualitative study. The	Quantitative and	Qualitative
Questions	study was conducted to	study was conducted	qualitative study.	study. This
(Qualitative)/H	establish the relationship	to assess the effects of	The objective of	study was
ypothesis	between patients’	the targeted	the study was to	conducted to
(Quantitative),	outcomes and healthcare	interventions on	assess the	describe
and	climate. This involved	CLABSIs trends.	feasibility of	peer-to-peer
Purposes/Aim	evaluating the functional		multicenter efforts	programs and
of Study	ability of the team to		of standardizing	outcomes of
	evaluate, coordinate and		CL care and	interventions
	adapt changing team		CLABSI tracking.	to reduce
	dynamics with an aim of		Again, the study	incidences of
	minimizing CLABSIs		aimed at	CLABSIs in
	upon catheter insertion		quantifying the	patients in
	and maintenance using		impact of	transplantation,
	evidence-based		standardizing	bone marrow,
	techniques.		processes on	surgical
			CLABSI rates	oncology, and
			among the	medical units.
			pediatric

ORDER NOW FOR A SIMILAR PAPER CUSTOMIZED TO YOUR NEEDS

			hematology/oncol ogy inpatients.
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)	The retrospective multi- center observational study utilizing teamwork climate data from 29 adult ICUs.	A before-and-after study between 2013 January and 2014 September.	Multicenter quality improvement collaborative starting November 2009	Qualitative design.
Setting/Sample	Michigan Hospital Association Keystone Centre for Patient Safety and Quality.	Tertiary hospital in the Republic of Korea. All patients having central-line catheters hospitals	Pediatric hematology/oncol ogy inpatients	Magnet- designated academic medical center using Medical and Surgical oncology units.
Methods:	Teamwork climate was	Interventions targeting	Multidisciplinary	The peer-to-
Intervention/Ins	assessed through	central line insertions	teams in the	peer process,
truments	validation of scores,	were implemented in	participating sites	team approach,
	safety culture survey. This	2014, September in 10	implemented	staff education,
	was administered through	ICUs. The impacts of	standardized	and the
	Safe and Reliable	targeted interventions	bundles of CL care	application of
	Healthcare from 2015,	on CLABSIs was	practices and	checklist.
	April 1 to 2015, May 30.	evaluated using	adopting a
		segmented	common approach
		autoregression	to CLABSIs
		analysis on the	surveillance.
		interrupted time series.
Analysis	The linear regression	The mean hospital-	The average pre-	Peer-to-peer
	model was employed to	wide CLABSIs	collaborative	process and
	predict teamwork climate	infection in the	CLABSI rate of	team approach
	scores. The model	intervention and	2.85 CLABSIs per	help reduce
	predicted 10.6% variance	baseline periods were	1000 CL-days was	rates of
	of CLABSIs. CLABSIs	1.56 and 1.84 per	reported by	CLABSIs in
	were found to be more	1000 catheter days	32 units that	the setting of
	common when ICUs	respectively. Baseline	participated in the	oncology. Staff
	workers reported	period recorded	collaborative	education is
	difficulties with speaking	increase of CLABSIs	study. A reduction	important in
	up, asking questions to	rate of 1.12 per 1000	rate of 28% of	introducing
	clarify ambiguities,	catheter days while the	CLABSIs was	new techniques
	communicating	intervention period	recorded.	of reducing
	breakdowns, working with	recorded a decrease of		CLABSIs. The
	difficult groups and	CLABSIs rate of 1.64		checklist
	resolving conflicts.	per 1000 catheter		provides
		days.		stepwise
				processes of
				ensuring safety
				in caring for

				patients with central lines.
Key Findings	CLABSIs’ variation is	After the sequential-	Multicenter quality	The peer-to-
	explained significantly by	targeted interventions,	improvement	peer process,
	teamwork climates as	CLABSIs rate	collaborative	checklist and
	assessed by frontline ICUs	decreased by 0.16 per	located significant	team approach
	workers. Clear link the	1000 catheter days.	reductions in	lower the
	between the rates of	This implies that	observed rates of	incidences of
	CLABSIs and teamwork	targeted interventions	CLABSI in the	CLABSIs
	climate suggests that	are associated with	pediatric	remarkably.
	patients’ outcome can be	notable changes in the	hematology/oncol	Precisely,
	improved by focusing on	trends in occurrence	ogy inpatients.	patients’
	the improvement of	rates of CLABSIs in	Again, additional	outcome is
	teamwork climate.	the ICUs and entire	interventions are	improved as
		hospitals.	required to bring	staff
			and sustain	satisfaction is
			CLABSIs rates	increased.
			closer to zero for
			the high-risk
			population.
Recommendatio	I recommend this to ICUs	I recommended this to	I recommend this	I recommend
ns	workers because ICU	ICUs and all hospitals	to pediatric	this to Medical
	workers are encouraged	because it provides	hematology/oncol	and Surgical
	how to report difficulties	sufficient evidence	ogy centers	oncology units
	through speaking up,	regarding the	because it presents	because its
	asking questions to clarify	importance of targeted	itself with	interventions,
	ambiguities,	interventions in	interventions that	peer-to-peer
	communicating	reducing CLABSIs	would reduce	process,
	breakdowns, working with	rates.	CLABSIs closer to	checklist and
	difficult groups and		zero.	team approach,
	resolving conflicts.			are capable of
				lowering the
				incidences of
				CLABSIs
		NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper		remarkably.
Explanation of	This article supports the	This article supports	The article	This article
How the Article	capstone project because	the capstone because	supports the	supports the
Supports	the clear link between the	of it is a source of	capstone project	capstone
EBP/Capstone	rates of CLABSIs and	sufficient evidence	because it utilizes	project because
Project	teamwork climate	regarding team’s effort	the multicenter	it utilizes the
	suggests that patients’	on targeted	quality	same
	outcome can be improved	interventions.	improvement	intervention,
	by focusing on improving		collaborative	team approach,
	teamwork climate.		techniques to	that the
			reduce rates of	CLABSIs
			CLABSI.	project uses in

its quest of lowering CLABSIs

rates.

Criteria	Article 5	Article 6	Article 7	Article 8
Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article	Sacks, G. D., Diggs, B. S., Hadjizacharia, P., Green, D., Salim, A., & Malinoski, D. J. https://www.ncbi.nl m.nih.gov/pubmed/ 24576582	Latif, A., Kelly, B., Edrees, H., Kent, P.S., Weaver, S.J., Jovanovic, B., Attallah, H., de Grouchy, K. K., Al-Obaidli, A., Goeschel, C.A. and Berenholtz, M.	Scheck, M. A, Hefner, J. L, Robbins, J., Harrison, M. I. and Garman A. https://www.ncbi.n lm.nih.gov/pubme d/25703102	Furuya, E. Y., Dick, A. W., Herzig, C. T., Pogorzelska- Maziarz, M., Larson, E. L and Stone, P. W. https://www.ncbi.nl m.nih.gov/pubmed/2 7052993
		https://www.ncbi.n lm.nih.gov/pubme d/25871927
Article Title and Year Published	Reducing the rate of catheter- associated bloodstream infections in a surgical intensive care unit using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Central Line Bundle. The American Journal of Surgery. NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper	Implementing a multifaceted intervention to decrease central line-associated bloodstream infections in SEHA (Abu Dhabi Health Services Company) intensive care units: the Abu Dhabi experience.	Preventing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A qualitative study of management practices. 2015	Central Line- Associated Bloodstream Infections and Bundle Compliance in ICUs: A National Study. 2016
		2015
	2014.
Research	Qualitative	Qualitative	Qualitative	Descriptive
Questions	research.	research. The	research. The	research.
(Qualitative)/Hypo	The study aimed at	study aimed at	study aimed at	The study aimed at
thesis	determining	determining	identifying factors	determining the
(Quantitative), and	whether the	whether	that explain	relationship between
Purposes/Aim of	implementation of	implementation of	hospital-level	CLABSIs rates and
Study	IHI (Institute for	multifaceted	differences in	bundle compliance.

	Healthcare Improvement) CL bundle would reduce the incidences of CLABSIs.	interventions would reduce incidences of CLABSIs significantly.	programs’ outcome to prevent CLABSIs.
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)	Qualitative study.	Prospective cohort collaborative	Extensive qualitative case study. NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper	Cross-sectional study
Setting/Sample	Surgical ICUs.	Abu Dhabi Health Services Company hospitals’ ICU in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi.	Eight United States hospitals that had participated in federally funded on the CUSP-Stop BSI initiative.	US adults in the ICUs.
Methods:	The rate of	Bundled	In-depth	Surveillance of the
Intervention/Instru	CLABSIs per	interventions	interviews	hospitals to
ments	1,000 catheter days	consisting of three	transcribing	determine
	and patient	components were	verbatim. Again,	compliance with
	demographics were	implemented as	and analyzing	catheter line
	compared between	part of the	emergent themes	insertion bundle
	the preintervention	programs. The	differentiated	element in ICUs.
	groups and	bundled	higher performing
	postintervention	interventions	hospitals from
	groups.	composed	lower performing
		multifaceted	hospitals.
		approach targeting
		clinicians using
		evidence-based
		infections
		prevention
		recommendations.
Analysis	Implementation of	An overall	Getting to zero	Of the 984 adult
	IHI Central Line	CLABSIs	CLABSIs	ICUs that the
	Bundles reduced	reduction rate of	infection provided	research was
	the rates of	18% was achieved	the difference	conducted, 69%
	CLABSIs in the	by the eighteen	between higher	reported excellent
	surgical ICU by	ICUs from seven	performing	compliance with at
	68% thus, saving	hospitals in Abu	hospitals from	least one element.
	$198,600 annually.	Dhabi that	lower performing	Better-resourced
		implemented the	hospitals. Higher	infections
		program.	performing	prevention
			hospitals state its	departments are

goal explicitly and aggressively while lower performing hospitals stated their goals with aspiration. Higher performing hospitals adopted five additional management practices, that is, top-level commitment, recognition and reward, meaningful use of data, systematic education and physician-nurse

alignment.

associated with lower limited rates of CLABSIs.

Key Findings

Baseline demographics between preintervention groups and postintervention groups was found to be similar.

However, rates of CLABSIs per catheter days reduced to 3/1,870 from 19/3,784 to after the implementation of IHI Bundle.

Using multifaceted intervention in desperate settings results in significant reduction of mortality and morbidity associated with CLABSIs.

Specific management practices provide critical guidance to hospital leaders, clinical managers, and physicians in preventing healthcare- associated infections. NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper

Compliance with the entire bundle is effective, though lower CLABSIs is associated with excellent compliance with the bundle with one element. At the national level, variability in compliance across the ICUs provides a room for improvement in the reduction of

CLABSIs.

Recommendations

I recommend this to surgical ICUs because measuring contemporaneous infection rates in surgical ICU reduced the infection by 68%.

I recommend this to hospitals because with multifaceted intervention a significant reduction in morbidity and mortality is

I recommend this to hospital leaders, clinical managers, and physicians because it provides them with management practices that reduce rates of

I recommend this to ICUs dealing with adults with CLABSIs because absolute compliance with insertion bundle provides a room for improvement.

achieved.

CLABSIs.

Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP/Capstone

This article supports the capstone project by providing a ground how measuring contemporaneous infection rates in surgical ICU, and hospitals in general, reduce incidences of CLABSIs.

The aim of the capstone project is applying relevant interventions to reduce the prevalence of CLABSIs.

Multifaceted intervention discussed in this article is among the appropriate interventions thus, making this article relevant.

This article supports the capstone project because it is a source of leadership and management practices providing hospital leaders, clinical managers, and physicians with knowledge of reducing CLABSISs rates.

This article supports the capstone project by advising on how to comply with insertion bundle.

Upon complying, there is a likelihood that rates of CLABSIs will reduce.

NRS 493 Week 4 Literature Evaluation Table Instructions

In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of research is essential to achieving successful outcomes. The ability to articulate research data and summarize relevant content supports the student\’s ability to further develop and synthesize the assignments that constitute the components of the capstone project.

The assignment will be used to develop a written implementation plan.

For this assignment, provide a synopsis of the review of the research literature. Using the \”Literature Evaluation Table,\” determine the level and strength of the evidence for each of the eight research articles you have selected. The articles should be current (within the last 5 years) and closely relate to the PICOT question developed earlier in this course. The articles may include quantitative research, descriptive analyses, longitudinal studies, or meta-analysis articles. A systematic review may be used to provide background information for the purpose or problem identified in the proposed capstone project.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

NRS493 Literature Evaluation Table Paper

NRS 493 Week 4 Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article

Target

2.5 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

1.98 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is not included.

Article Title and Year Published

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Article Title and Year Published

Target

2.5 points

Article title and year published section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Article title and year published section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

1.98 points

Article title and year published section is present.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Article title and year published section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Article title and year published section is not included.

Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes or Aim of Study

5 points

Criteria Description

Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes or Aim of Study

Target

5 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

3.95 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is not included.

Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)

Target

2.5 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

1.98 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is not included.

Setting or Sample

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Setting or Sample

Target

2.5 points

Setting or sample section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Setting or sample section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

1.98 points

Setting or sample section is present.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Setting or sample section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Setting or sample section is not included.

Methods: Intervention or Instruments

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Methods: Intervention or Instruments

Target

2.5 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

1.98 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is not included.

Analysis

5 points

Criteria Description

Analysis

Target

5 points

Analysis section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Analysis section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

3.95 points

Analysis section is present.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Analysis section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Analysis section is not included.

Key Findings

5 points

Criteria Description

Key Findings

Target

5 points

Key findings section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Key findings section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

3.95 points

Key findings section is present.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Key findings section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Key findings section is not included.

Recommendations

5 points

Criteria Description

Recommendations

Target

5 points

Recommendations section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Recommendations section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

3.95 points

Recommendations section is present.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Recommendations section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Recommendations section is not included.

Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone

5 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone

Target

5 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is clearly provided and well developed.

Approaching

3.95 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is provided.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is not included.

Presentation

5 points

Criteria Description

Presentation

Target

5 points

The work is well presented and includes all required elements. The overall appearance is neat and professional.

Accpetable

4.45 points

The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor flaws or missing elements.

Approaching

3.95 points

The overall appearance is general, and major elements are missing.

Insufficient

3.75 points

The work is not neat and includes minor flaws or omissions of required elements.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The piece is not neat or organized, and it does not include all required elements.

Mechanics of Writing

5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

Target

5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Accpetable

4.45 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

Approaching

3.95 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

Insufficient

3.75 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Format/Documentation

2.5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

Target

2.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

Accpetable

2.23 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

1.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

Insufficient

1.88 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total50 points