Please look at the uploaded documents

write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two qualitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part 1” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.

Use the practice problem and two qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.

In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

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

these practices mandatory, requiring support in order to
enforce them. Preliminary chart review at UTSW showed low
adherence overall.
Objectives Our aim was to improve opioid treatment standards
in CNCP patients at UTSW by increasing the number of
physicians adhering to Texas Medical Board CNCP treatment
requirements to 100% by December 2020.
Methods A three-part intervention including an electronic
medical record (EMR) navigator tool (figure 1), chronic
opioids registry, and physician education was developed to
improve accessibility, documentation, and understanding of
opioid prescribing guideline recommendations. A survey was
developed to measure physician barriers to policy adherence,
attitudes toward the policy components, and current opioid
prescribing practices.

Results Physicians who had used the EMR navigator tool
reported overall greater use of several guideline-concordant
treatment components compared to those who had not used
it (figure 2). Physicians who received opioid prescribing train-
ing were more aware and familiar with the policy. Those who
had used the EMR navigator tool were more likely to imple-
ment pain management agreements and check the PMP (table
1). Only a small percentage of respondents reported co-pre-
scribing naloxone for high-risk CNCP individuals (table 2).
Conclusions An EMR navigator tool to improve accessibility
of treatment components is effective in improving policy
adherence at our institution. These interventions may serve as
a valuable tool at other academic medical centers to support
safer opioid prescribing and provide a framework for tools to
support other guidelines as well.

26 REDUCING CENTRAL LINE ASSOCIATED BLOODSTREAM
INFECTIONS IN THE NEUROSURGICAL AND SURGICAL
INTENSIVE CARE UNITS

Geralda Xavier, Briana Episcopia, Mikael Phillip. NYC Health + Hospitals/Kings County, USA

10.1136/bmjoq-2020-IHI.26

Background In 2018 there was an increase in Central Line
Associated Bloodstream Infections (CLABSIs) in the Neurosur-
gical and Surgical Intensive Care Units at NYC Health + Hos-
pitals/Kings County
Objectives We initiated a CLABSI reduction project with a
goal to reduce the CLABSI rate by 50% by the end of 2019,
which was achieved.
Methods Through root cause analysis (RCA) of patients with
central line catheters, CLABSI event data was analyzed and a
special cause variation was revealed in patients on total paren-
teral nutrition (TPN). Retrospective review of data from Janu-
ary 2017 – March 2019 revealed 7 TPN-related candidemias.
An interdisciplinary team was assembled to perform multiple
tests of change. Using point prevalence data, we observed a
47% bundle compliance rate at the project’s onset, with the
initial PDSA cycle focusing on bundle adherence for line
maintenance. After implementing and sustaining our initial
PDSA cycle, we focused additional cycles to included empiric
treatment with fluconazole for patients

Research Article
Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Central Line
Associated Blood Stream Infection following Introduction of
a Central Line Bundle in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

Molly Bannatyne ,1 Judith Smith,2 Malavika Panda,2

Mohamed E. Abdel-Latif ,1,2 and Tejasvi Chaudhari 1,2

1Australian National University Medical School, 54 Mills Road Acton, ACT 2601, Canberra, Australia
2The Canberra Hospital Department of Neonatology, Building 11 level 2 Centenary Hospital for Women and Children,
ACT 2606 Canberra, Australia

Correspondence should be addressed to Tejasvi Chaudhari; [email protected]

Received 17 May 2018; Revised 1 August 2018; Accepted 13 August 2018; Published 2 September 2018

Academic Editor: Namik Y. Ozbek

Copyright © 2018 Molly Bannatyne et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.

Background. Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infections (CLABSI) constitute a leading cause of morbidity and mortality
in neonatal populations. There has been an overwhelming increase in the use of evidence-based care practices, also known as
bundles, in the reduction of these infections. In this report, rates of CLABSI and central line utilisation were examined following
the introduction of a central line bundle in our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) at the Canberra Hospital. Methods. The
research undertaken was a retrospective cohort study in which newborn infants admitted to the Canberra Hospital NICU between
January 2011 and December 2016 and had a central line inserted were included in the study. Data regarding central line days,
bed days, infection rates, and patient demographics were collected before and after the introduction of an intervention bundle.
CLABSI rates were calculated per 1,000 central line days for before (2011-2013) and after (2014-2016) the introduction of the bundle.
The postintervention period was retrospectively analysed for compliance, with data regarding the completion of maintenance
forms and insertion forms collected. Results. Overall, the results showed a significant decrease in CLABSI rates from 8.8 per 1,000
central line days to 4.9 per 1,000 central line days in the intervention period (p<0.001). Central line utilisation ratio (CLUR: ratio
of central line days to bed days) was also reduced between pre- and postintervention periods, from 0.177 (4414/25013) to 0.13
(3633/27384; p<0.001). Compliance to insertion forms and maintenance forms was observed to increase within the intervention
period. Conclusion. The implementation of a central line bundle was effective in reducing both CLABSI rates and

Research Critique Guidelines – Part I

Use this document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.

Qualitative Studies


Background of Study

1. Summary of studies. Include problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research question.


How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue you chose?

1. Discuss how these two articles will be used to answer your PICOT question.

2. Describe how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in your PICOT question.


Method of Study:

1. State the methods of the two articles you are comparing and describe how they are different.

2. Consider the methods you identified in your chosen articles and state one benefit and one limitation of each method.


Results of Study

1. Summarize the key findings of each study in one or two comprehensive paragraphs.

2. What are the implications of the two studies in nursing practice?


Ethical Considerations

1. Discuss two ethical consideration in conducting research.

2. Describe how the researchers in the two articles you choose took these ethical considerations into account while performing their research.

2

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NRS-433V NRS-433V-O505 Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations 190.0
Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) 3: Satisfactory (83.00%) 4: Good (94.00%) 5: Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 75.0%
Qualitative Studies 5.0% Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use qualitative research. Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on qualitative research. N/A N/A Two articles are presented. Both articles are based on qualitative research.
Background of Study 10.0% Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.
Article Support of Nursing Practice Issue 15.0% Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete. A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail are required. A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed. A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support. A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT ques