ASU Reasons for The Deleterious Impact on The Nursing Profession Discussion
ASU Reasons for The Deleterious Impact on The Nursing Profession Discussion
Description
Reply 1
The research-practice gap is one that has had a deleterious effect on the nursing profession as a whole. Although most nursing programs have a nursing research course of something similar, I find that few bedside nurses have a genuine appreciation for the role of research in clinical practice changes. Improving patient outcomes, perpetuating a culture of continuous quality improvement, and reducing healthcare expenditures would be nearly impossible without nursing research and nurses who are actively engaged in research translation (Curtis et al., 2017).
You gave an excellent description of knowledge distillation in a community health setting. Utilizing demographics, data pertaining to the local population, current best evidence, and clinical practice guidelines, comprehensive community-based interventions can be planned and implemented for a variety of public health issues. Creating sustainable change on this level perpetuates further success through evaluation of the interventions and dissemination of new findings.
Reply 2
Thank you for sharing an informative discussion post. As you mentioned there are barriers to translation of knowledge through evidence-based practice research. Nurses have identified limited resources as a barrier to knowledge of evidence-based nursing practices. In addition, nurses cite negative attitude, lack of training, time mismanagement and lack of motivation as additional barriers to implementation of evidence-based practices (Dagne & Beshah, 2021).
Nurses often find themselves in unfamiliar roles as front-line providers navigating appropriate clinical judgment and decisions (Klimek Yingling, 2021). This substantiates the need to embrace the implementation of evidence-based practice by addressing the identified barriers. It is imperative that Doctor of Nursing Practice prepared nurses contribute to efforts to improve patient outcomes by participating in new studies, incorporating the evidence into clinical practice and disseminating information to colleagues.
Reply 3
Thank you for your informative post. You and I responded similarly to the discussion prompt questions. Like you, I saw knowledge distillation as a strategy that can be used to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice. Curtis (2017) notes that research should be disseminated but not all research is translatable. The Essentials of Doctoral Education for Advanced Nursing Practice (2006) identify 8 competencies deemed necessary for all graduates of a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) program. Essential III speaks to “Clinical Scholarship and Analytical Methods for Evidence-Based Practice”. Scholars apply knowledge to solve a problem via the scholarship of application in practice. This application involves the translation of research into practice and the dissemination and integration of new knowledge, which are key activities of DNP graduates.
The “focus of the DNP practice is not viewed from the lens of discovery, but from the lens of translation of the best evidence into practice” (Walker & Polancich, 2015, p. 266). The work of translation may lead to additional elements of discovery, but the impact of the DNP may be most effectively determined through quantifiable improvements at the macrosystem or microsystem level. Examples of improvements and translation include DNP leadership on interprofessional teams, DNPs leading system-based improvement efforts using learned tools and techniques for change and DNPs translating research and new knowledge generated into the provision of evidence-based practice guidelines to an identified patient population.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||