NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention
NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention
Name
Capella university
NURS-FPX 8035 Foundations of Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing
Prof. Name
Date
Restating the PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention
The formulated PICOT question is: Among hospitalized patients (P), does the implementation of an incident reporting system (I), compared to the absence of such a system (C), lead to improved patient safety outcomes (O) over a six-month period (T)? The breakdown of this PICOT framework includes: P (patients admitted to a hospital), I (implementation of incident reporting), C (no incident reporting), O (improved safety outcomes), and T (six months). This clinical inquiry builds upon the study by Petschnig and Haslinger-Baumann (2017), which investigated the impact of incident reporting systems in hospital settings and their role in promoting patient safety. Evaluating the effectiveness of the change strategy within the fifth phase of the evidence-based practice (EBP) model remains a central objective of this initiative.
The desired outcome is to reduce the occurrence of patient falls, nurse and staff injuries, and medication-related errors within the hospital environment. Initial baseline data revealed that in 2018, there were three incidents involving patient falls and two cases of medication-related allergic reactions. In 2019, records showed four patient falls, one nurse sustaining a broken arm, and one staff member receiving medical attention due to an incident.
After introducing the incident reporting system in 2020, the facility reported no patient falls, with only one case of an allergy caused by a medication error. This marks a complete (100%) reduction in patient falls and a 50% reduction in allergy-related incidents compared to 2019. Furthermore, there were no reported injuries involving staff or nurses during 2020, indicating the potential effectiveness of the intervention within its first year (Petschnig & Haslinger-Baumann, 2017).
Continuation of the Intervention Plan
The intervention plan is designed to continue for a three-month duration. To effectively monitor and evaluate this initiative using evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies, it is essential to identify appropriate performance indicators and gather data consistently. Two key metrics to be tracked include the weekly number of reported incidents and the average response time per incident. These indicators will allow for timely identification of trends and assessment of system responsiveness.
Additionally, it is necessary to carefully plan and document other variables, including the type of incident, the time taken to respond, the length of each incident, the staff member responsible for documenting the event, the patient’s age and gender, and the reason for their hospital admission. Regular data collection on a weekly, monthly, and yearly basis will facilitate the detection of both immediate and long-term patterns, enabling informed decision-making and timely adjustments to the intervention as needed.
Sustaining the Intervention Strategy
Sustaining any new process, particularly one involving a shift in clinical practice, demands active management support. The primary strategy for maintaining evidence-based practice is securing management’s commitment to fostering a supportive environment for healthcare providers (Carlfjord et al., 2018). Leadership should organize strategy meetings and encourage ongoing dialogue with physicians, nurses, and other healthcare staff. Actively incorporating staff feedback into the improvement process will enhance engagement and contribute to the long-term success of the intervention.
Management’s involvement in these initiatives is crucial not only for morale but also for integrating evidence-based practices into daily operations. Regular evaluations and updates, informed by staff input and data analysis, will ensure that the incident reporting system continues to meet its objectives and drive patient safety improvements over time.
References
Carlfjord, S., Ohrn, A., & Gunnarsson, A. (2018). Experiences from ten years of incident reporting in health care: A qualitative study among department managers and coordinators. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3012-1
NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention
Petschnig, W., & Haslinger-Baumann, E. (2017). Critical Incident Reporting System (CIRS): A fundamental component of risk management in health care systems to enhance patient safety. Safety in Health, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40886-017-0059-9
Appendix
Revisions were made based on previously received feedback. For instance, in alignment with APA guidelines, numbers less than ten were spelled out, and journal titles were appropriately capitalized. The proper use of “et al.” was applied when citing works with three or more authors. A personal strength demonstrated through this work is the capacity for comprehensive data collection and analysis for quality improvement purposes, while initial difficulties in intervention planning were effectively addressed following constructive feedback.
