coursework-banner

NUR 590 The systematic evaluation plan

NUR 590 The systematic evaluation plan

NUR 590 The systematic evaluation plan

The systematic evaluation plan refers to a faculty-owned, faculty-created, and a faculty-driven document that deliver or conveys the deliberate evaluation and assessment of all the end-of-program student learning outcomes, and most importantly, the faculty’s data-driven decisions to advance the achievement of learners (Espinosa, 2016). Systematic evaluation consists of various components that are used to direct different activities when it comes to the learning processes. In every educational organization, systematic evaluation is important as it aids in both the accreditation and reaccreditation processes.

Clinically significant evidence is defined as a result is granted where actual and measurable results have been achieved through intervention. Clinical significance depends on the affected size (correlating multiple variables), the number needed to treat (the affected sample size), and the Jacobson-Truax (calculates reliability change index). In practice, significant clinical results may be reproduced to a considerably higher degree than just significant statistical findings and can thus be utilized in the circumstances with more significant stakes when even a slim margin of mistake is too high (MHA, 2021). The clinical relevance aims at understanding the extent and extent of an impact. This is a vital tool for policymakers working on the pharmacological, psychological, and medical fields of high interest.

Components of Systematic Evaluation

Some of the components of the systematic evaluation plan include study selection, which is often done according to the predefined eligibility criteria. The second component is the systematic and extensive searchers, which involves the identification of all the relevant published and unpublished literatures (Espinosa, 2016).  Assessment of the risk of bias is the third components of the systematic evaluation plan and it involves the evaluation of the risks included in various studies. The fourth component is the presentation of the findings which is often done in an impartial and independent manner (Kettlewell & Henry, 2019). The final aspect of the systematic evaluation plan is the engagement in the discussion of the limitations of the evidence as well as the reviews. The implementation of all the components of the systematic evaluation plan often leads to the successful faculty activities.

The systematic evaluation plan is used to assure the needs of the stakeholder and the schools are met. With

the evaluation processes, the experts involved often ensure the incorporation of different items that are essential in the education processes (Kettlewell & Henry, 2019). Through following the above components, the experts involved usually ensure the incorporation of all the needs of the stakeholders. The involvement of the faculty in the systematic evaluation plan is essential because they may reveal the necessary requirements in the development processes.

References

Espinosa, E. O. C. (2016). Systemic knowledge-based assessment of higher education programs. Hersey, NY: IGI Global.

Kettlewell, J. S., & Henry, R. J. (2019). Increasing the competitive edge in math and science. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Assessment Description

In 750-1,000 words, develop an evaluation plan to be included in your final evidence-based practice project proposal. You will use the evaluation plan in the Topic 8 assignment, during which you will synthesize the various aspects of your project into a final paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Provide the following criteria in the evaluation, making sure it is comprehensive and concise:

  • Review the various data collection tools associated with your selected research design and select one data collection tool that would be effective for your researchdesign. Explain how this tool is valid, reliable, and applicable.
  • Discuss the expected outcomes for your evidence-based practice project proposal.
  • Select a statistical test for your project and explain why it is best suited for the tool you choose.NUR 590 The systematic evaluation plan
  • Describe what methods you will apply to your data collection tool and how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool you selected.
  • Propose strategies that will be taken if outcomes do not provide positive or expected results.
  • Describe the plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NUR 590 The systematic evaluation plan

To accomplish this assignment, you must mention at least five peer-reviewed sources. Sources must be recent (5 years) and relevant to the assignment criteria and nursing subject. NUR 590 Project Proposal Evaluation Plan for Evidence-Based Practice

Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to confirm that your paper follows APA style and formatting rules as well as general academic writing guidelines. At the end of your paper, include the completed checklist as an appendix. NUR 590 Project Proposal Evaluation Plan for Evidence-Based Practice

Also Check Out: NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan GCU

Prepare this work in accordance with the APA Style Guide, which may be found in the Student Success Center.

https://nursingassignmentgurus.com/nur-590-evidence-based-practice-project-proposal-evaluation-plan/

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

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Discuss the difference between statistically significant evidence and clinically significant evidence. How would each of these findings be used to advance an evidenced-based practice project?

In clinical research, statistically significant study results are frequently interpreted as clinically significant. While statistical significance indicates the study’s reliability, clinical significance reflects the study’s impact on clinical practice. In clinical practice, a result’s “clinical significance” is determined by its implications for current practice, with treatment effect size being one of the most important factors driving treatment decisions. While established, traditionally accepted values exist for statistical significance testing, this is not the case for determining clinical significance. More often than not, it is the clinician’s (and the patient’s) judgment that determines whether a result is clinically significant or not.

Statistical significance is heavily dependent on the sample size of the study; with large sample sizes, even small treatment effects (which are clinically insignificant) can appear statistically significant; thus, the reader must carefully interpret whether this “significance” is clinically meaningful (Ranganathan et al., 2015).

Clinical significance is important in vaccine testing, pharmaceutical testing, and other types of medical research where the magnitude and specific implications of a specific intervention must be measured and quantified. Statistical significance assists scientists, businesses, and other entities in determining how strongly the outcomes of an experiment, survey, or poll should influence their decisions. However, it is far from the only factor to consider when determining the significance of a particular result. Sample size, contextual characteristics, and more comprehensive research must all be considered (MHAonline, n.d).

Reference

Ranganathan, P., Pramesh, C. S., & Buyse, M. (2015). Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Clinical versus statistical significance. Perspectives in clinical research6(3), 169–170. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.159943

MHAOnline (n.d). Comparing Clinical Significance & Statistical Significance: Similarities and Differences. Retrieved from https://www.mhaonline.com/faq/clinical-vs-statistical-significance

The evaluation of evidence-based practice (EBP) project proposal is essential to ascertain the effectiveness of the suggested intervention. The evaluation must define the expected outcomes, and identify data collection tools to determine their effectiveness, validity, reliability and application to the project (Melnyk et al., 2019). Additionally, statistical tests for the proposed intervention should be selected and be appropriate or align with the data collection tools. The purpose of this paper to describe the evaluation plan for the proposed EBP project of implementing Fall TIPS to reduce falls among adult patients in medical-surgical unit.

Expected Outcomes

The EBP process implores one to identify the expected outcomes of the proposed project. Most EBP projects focus on improving quality of patient care through leveraging research evidence and optimization of clinical skills and knowledge. Imperatively, the main expected outcome for this EBP project proposal is to reduce the occurrence of patient falls in the medical-surgical unit by 30% within six months of the implementation (Rebekah et al., 2018). The expectation is that implementing Fall TIPS will allow nurses and other providers to tailor fall prevention interventions based on a patient’s condition and not a one-fits-all approach.

Data Collection Tool: Validity, Reliability & Applicability

While there are different data collection tools for EBP project proposal. In this case, the project will use qualitative design meaning that it will apply questionnaires and focus groups as well as observation to collect data on the efficacy of the proposed intervention. These data collection tools are valid and applicable as well as reliable since they gather data from patients on firsthand experience. These tools will be effective because they will integrate diverse aspects of the project and what it means for patients in the setting (Grove et al., 2019). The semi-structured questions and observations will complement each other and increase the overall validity and reliability.

Statistical Test

Researchers use appropriate statistical test tools based on the type of data collection deployed. Researchers use statistical test to organize data into evaluable results to determine the effectiveness of an EBP project proposal. Because of the various sets of subjects and data collection tools, the most appropriate statistical test will be the t-test. The independent t-test has data from different subjects so difference in measurements among the individuals can be determined (Rebekah et al., 2018). This test is best-suited to the project due to the data collection tools selected to gather information from patients on Fall TIPS model.

Methods Applied to the Data Collection Tool

As part of the evaluation plan, methods must be uses to the data collection tool and consideration should be made on outcome measures. Method analysis and presentation influences the evaluation of study claims, promotes more rigor on access to data and encouraged increased transparency and honesty in research. Using data collected through semi-structured questionnaires, the researchers will measure patient outcomes and experiences (Lengnick-Hall et al., 2020). They will then tabulate the data to determine if there are changes after the implementation of the Fall TIPS. The research will the deploy computation tools to determine rates of improvement based on the reduction of falls within the unit.

Alternative Strategies

An effective evaluation plan must develop alternative strategies that can be used if outcomes are not positive or fail to deliver expected results. Improving care quality through reduced prevalence of falls is an iterative process meaning that it is not immune to corrections and refining as providers learn from experience to improve outcomes. The implication is that the project will integrate effective approaches that include better communication and collaboration, use of inter-professional interventions based on better communication approaches.

Strategies to Address Unexpected or Negative Outcomes

It is anticipated that the proposed intervention will result in positive outcomes as indicated above. However, in the event that the outcomes are negative, the researchers will deploy various strategies to correct the issue. The first strategy will be to re-examine the implemented intervention by analyzing the process and all components associated with ach stage. Such an approach may reveal weak areas of the project that requires improvement for the intervention to offer better outcomes. The next strategy is formulation of new timelines, especially extending the project schedule and time. This will allow the stakeholders to explore corrective measures and possibly have better outcomes. The other aspect would be to change the implementation model or conceptual framework, if possible, and where it does not offer better interpretation of the expected outcomes.

Plan to Maintain, Extend, Revise, & Discontinue the EBP Project

The maintenance, extension, revision and discontinuation of the EBP project will require developing an appropriate plan. In this case, sustenance of the EBP implementation will require training, continual quality monitoring, and developing teams that will review areas of concern and ensure that the Fall TIPS focus on patient needs and concerns. Review of objectives and goals will also be important as it identify areas that may be discontinued because of their inappropriateness to the project Revision will be based on the project’s inability to meet expected outcomes. The review process will trigger change aimed at providing better approaches to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

Conclusion

Evaluation is a critical phase of the EBP process and project implementation. Developing an evaluation plan allows stakeholders and project team to understand different aspects of the implementation and the expected outcomes. The evaluation plan identifies weak areas and what the implementers can integrate to attain expected outcomes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Grove, S. K., & Cipher, D. J. (2019). Statistics for Nursing Research-e-book: A

            workbook for evidence-based practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Lengnick-Hall, R., Willging, C. E., Hurlburt, M. S., & Aarons, G. A. (2020). Incorporators, early

investors, and learners: A longitudinal study of organizational adaptation during EBP implementation and sustainment. Implementation Science, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01031-w

Koota, E., Kääriäinen, M., Kyngäs, H., Lääperi, M., & Melender, H. (2021). Effectiveness of

evidence‐based practice (EBP) education on emergency nurses’ EBP attitudes, knowledge, self‐efficacy, skills, and behavior: A randomized controlled trial. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(1), 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12485

Melnyk, B. M. & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence-based Practice in Nursing &

            Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice. Wolters Kluwer.

Rebekah, G., & Ravindran, V. (2018). Statistical analysis in nursing research. Indian Journal of

Continuing Nursing Education,19(1), 62-70. https://www.ijcne.org/text.asp?

2018/19/1/62/28649

Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Evaluation Plan – Rubric

Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

Criteria Description

Expected Outcomes for Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

5. 5: Excellent

14.4 points

Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Thorough explanations and strong supporting research are provided.

4. 4: Good

13.25 points

Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are discussed. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

12.67 points

Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are summarized. More information is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

11.52 points

Some expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are only partially outlined. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Expected outcomes for the evidence-based practice project proposal are not discussed.

Data Collection Tools

Criteria Description

Data Collection Tools

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

A data collection tool is selected and a well-supported explanation for why the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable and would be effective for the research design is presented. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

4. 4: Good

11.04 points

A data collection tool is selected, and an explanation for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. An explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

A data collection tool is selected, and a summary for why the tool would be effective for the research design is presented. A general explanation for the tool is valid, reliable, and applicable, but more information and support are needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

A data collection tool is selected, but it is unclear why the tool would be effective for the research design. A valid, reliable, and applicable explanation for the tool is incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A data collection tool is not discussed.

Statistical Test for Project

Criteria Description

Statistical Test for Project

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

A statistical test is selected, and a well-supported explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is clearly presented.

4. 4: Good

11.04 points

A statistical test is selected, and an explanation for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

A statistical test is selected, and a summary for why the test is best suited for the tool is presented. More information or support is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

A statistical test is selected, but it is unclear why the test is best suited for the tool.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A statistical test is omitted.

Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool

Criteria Description

Methods Applied to Data Collection Tool

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Methods that will be applied to the data collection are thoroughly discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected are presented. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

4. 4: Good

11.04 points

Methods that will be applied to the data collection are discussed. A discussion of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

Methods that will be applied to the data collection are outlined. A summary of how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected is presented. More information or support is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool partially discussed. It is unclear how the outcomes will be measured and evaluated based on the tool selected. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Methods that will be applied to the data collection tool are not discussed.

Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive

Criteria Description

Strategies for Outcomes That Are Nonpositive

5. 5: Excellent

14.4 points

Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

4. 4: Good

13.25 points

Clear and well-supported strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented.

3. 3: Satisfactory

12.67 points

General strategies for nonpositive outcomes are presented. More information and support are needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

11.52 points

Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Strategies for nonpositive outcomes are not discussed.

Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution

Criteria Description

Plans to Maintain, Extend, Revise, and Discontinue Proposed Solution

5. 5: Excellent

13.2 points

Detailed and well-supported plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented.

4. 4: Good

12.14 points

Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or support.

3. 3: Satisfactory

11.62 points

General plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are presented. More information and support are needed. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

10.56 points

Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are incomplete. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Plans to maintain, extend, revise, and discontinue a proposed solution after implementation are not discussed.

Required Sources

Criteria Description

Required Sources

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

4. 4: Good

5.52 points

Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.28 points

Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.8 points

Number of required sources is only partially met.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not included.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. 5: Excellent

8.4 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. 4: Good

7.73 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

7.39 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6.72 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. 5: Excellent

9.6 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. 4: Good

8.83 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. 3: Satisfactory

8.45 points

Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.68 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. 4: Good

5.52 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.28 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.8 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Criteria Description

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

4. 4: Good

5.52 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.28 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.8 points

All format elements are correct.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. 4: Good

5.52 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. 3: Satisfactory

5.28 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.8 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. NUR 590 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Evaluation Plan

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Resources

Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession

Review Chapter 20 in Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession.


Reliability and Validity: Linking Evidence to Practice

Read “Reliability and Validity: Linking Evidence to Practice,” by Kamper, from Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

… 


Evaluation of Bedside Shift Report: A Research and Evidence-Based Practice Initiative

Read “Evaluation of Bedside Shift Report: A Research and Evidence-Based Practice Initiative,” by Schirm, Banz, Swartz, and Richmond, from <

… 


Evidence-Based Practice Educational Intervention Studies: A Systematic Review of What Is Taught and How It I s Measured

Read “Evidence-Based Practice Educational Intervention Studies: A Systematic Review of What is Taught and How it is Measured,” by Albarqoun

… 


Comparing Clinical Significance and Statistical Significance – Similarities and Differences

Read “Comparing Clinical Significance and Statistical Significance – Similarities and Differences,” by Zbrog (2021), located on the MHA Onl

… 


A Practical Definition of Evidence-Based Practice for Nursing

Read “A Practical Definition of Evidence-Based Practice for Nursing,” by Stannard, from Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing (2019).<

… 


Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice

Review Chapter 25 in Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice.


Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice

Read Chapter 4 and review Chapter 3 in Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice.


Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Clinical Improvement/Innovation Posters

Read “Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Clinical Improvement/Innovation Posters” (2015), from AORN Journal.

https://lopes.idm.oclc.o

Identify two stakeholder barriers you might experience during the implementation phase of your evidence-based practice project. What strategies can you implement to gain stakeholder support for the project implementation. Provide a suggestion you would give to a colleague who is struggling with obtaining stakeholder support.

Two stakeholder barriers that I might experience during the implementation phase of my evidence-based practice (EBP) project would be lack of time and knowledge and skills of the EBP process. Strategies that I can implement to gain stakeholder support for the implementation of my project would be to allow dedicated time for them to work on the project so that they do not feel that they must compete with their daily tasks and priorities at the same time. Having dedicated time to work on the project can offset the stress they may feel from being interrupted by others when working in their daily role at the same time they are trying to work on the project. Another strategy would be to assign roles and duties evenly to avoid some members being overwhelmed with tasks and others having a lighter assignment of tasks and duties to carry out.

A strategy that I can take to increase the knowledge and skills of EBP process in the stakeholders would be providing education and mentoring during the engagement and integration phase so that it will help the stakeholders overcome the knowledge and skill deficits that they have (Rodgers et al., 2019). This will help to address any questions, skepticism around EBP change, and hopefully provide a higher likelihood of having a positive EBP change. Another strategy that I can take is to encourage the stakeholders to use the organizations clinical ladder program that will provide them with incentives for being involved with the project and this in return would hopefully increase stakeholder engagement and increase their proficiency with the EBP process (Rodgers et al., 2019). A suggestion that I would give to a colleague that is struggling with gaining stakeholder support would be to perform an assessment of the stakeholders’ beliefs and opinions are around EBP. Once that is done, then these barriers can be addressed, and further education can be provided around the results of the assessment. This will help the stakeholders feel that their concerns are being addressed and that they matter. This will also help tackle any concerns early on versus them coming up later in the process.

Reference:

Rodgers, C. C., Brown, T. L., & Hockenberry, M. J. (2019). Implementing evidence in clinical settings. Evidenced-based practice in nursing and healthcare: A guide to best practice (pp. 269-292). Wolters Kluwer.

  • DH