| End of Program Student Learning Outcomes |
| Quality Care Interpret research to employ best practice. Use data to monitor the outcomes of care processes. Propose an evaluation process to continuously improve the quality and safety of health care systems and deliver quality care to individuals, and diverse populations |
| Professionalism Formulate a plan that demonstrates an enhanced commitment to professionalism embracing excellence, caring, legal and ethical practice, civility, accountability, and professional development. |
| 3.Communication Evaluate communication and collaboration with colleagues, interprofessional groups and members of the community to promote health, safety and well-being across the lifespan and across the continuum of healthcare environment. |
| 4. Leadership Evaluate the contribution of leadership, quality improvement principles, and impact of organizational systems in transforming, managing, and coordinating safe, quality, cost effective, person-centered care. |
| 5.Critical Thinking/Clinical Reasoning Integrate a systematic process of critical inquiry with nursing science, natural and behavioral sciences, arts and humanities to make evidence-based practice decisions to improve the care of individuals, families, populations, and communities. |
Purpose: Students willpropose an innovative, practical application for a quality improvement project. The project will address all end of program student learning outcomes though some may be emphasized to different extents.
Guidelines:
- Students may work individually or in teams of two. If you request >2, you should expand the topic extent or complexity
- Pairs/ Groups should agree to equivalent division of work.
Topics: Choose a clinical practice issue in nursing that you identify as one which you believe needs to be changed (i.e. change in a policy or procedure, complex problems with patient safety, response to patient needs, etc.). Please see the attached list (below) for some ideas. Consider ideas from your LPN, AND, RN-BSN clinical/ practicum experiences as well as those from employment in any healthcare role. However, proposed changes should be focused on RN scope and responsibilities.
Talk to your preceptor, a charge nurse, a peer or an educator on a unit about needs for improvement. Include at least one reference to ideas discussed with one of these nurses. You may also include ideas from a nurse with either considerably more or less experience than yourself .
- You will create a presentation and present to the class in the final week. You must also submit your teaching tool and references and if possible, your recorded presentation in the D2L drop-box. I can also record and post Zoom meetings upon request. (EOPSLO 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
Presentation & Teaching Tool (~15 mins)
- Research the issue/problem and provide scientific or evidence-based practice support. Use current information (within 5 years) from healthcare journals (nursing, pharmacology, medicine). Textbooks may be used as sources. Websites will be accepted only if .edu, .gov, or other evidence-supported publication. Articles from some professional websites or free professional online journals may also be used.
- Headings/labels should be used to organize the information as follows:
[SLIDE 1]
- Needs Assessment: Provide background on the clinical issue and the reason the change or new process is needed. (EOPSLO 1,5)
[SLIDE 2]
- Proposed Change: Support the new process with scientific /evidenced-based research. The process may be a policy or process change or an innovation. If proposing a new device or innovation in healthcare, you must submit a sketch or sample to demonstrate how the innovation would work in practice. (EOPSLO 1,2,5)
[SLIDE 3]
- Process for Implementation- Include the following: (EOPSLO 2, 3, 4, 5)
- Describe the plan to communicate with the staff and other stakeholders.
- What kind of costs and budget will be needed?
[SLIDE 4]
- What motivational strategies will be utilized?
- Determine how the staff will be educated on the new process and create or find a teaching tool (video, handout, activity, etc.).
[SLIDE 5]
- The road blocks to acceptance; how to deal with employee/management resistance.
- Is a pilot study needed prior to expanding to the whole health system or hospital?
[SLIDE 6]
- Anticipated timeframe for change.
- Plan for how the change will be implemented (Use Lewin’s change theory to describe and support the steps for change).
- Interventions planned to make this change successful.
[SLIDE 7]
- Conclusion: A conclusion should be included at the end of the presentation that summarizes the findings and actions. (EPSLO 5). This does include knowledge gained from conversations.
[SLIDE 8]
- References: The reference list should be submitted in a Word document. Please adhere to current 7th ed. APA formatting. A minimum of 9 acceptable references should be used. (EPSLO 1,5)
Items to be Submitted for Grading:
- Presentation (narrated Power point , video)
- Teaching Tool (video, handout, activity, poster)
- Reference list (minimum of 9)
Possible Topics
- Identifying and managing aggressive patients.
- Effectively mentor critical thinking skills and build resiliency in new graduate nurses
- Adequately explain end of life options in ways that families and patients understand
- Effects of sound (music or nature sounds, rain, white noise, etc.) on stress/anxiety patients or staff in a defined clinical setting
- Holistic care methods with patients experiencing mental health challenges in an acute care setting
- Effective preceptor development and performance (topic limited to students with at least 5 years RN practice)
- Guidelines for allowing or disallowing family presence in critical care areas or during invasive procedures.
- Care of patients with concurrent medical/surgical and mental health or substance abuse conditions.
- Mock codes or other simulations to improve RN skill and confidence
- Best practices to increase patient satisfaction; include validity of patient satisfaction determinants.
- Identify, quantitate, and address practices that may result in healthcare disparities faced by some patient populations.
- Best practices to screen protect patients with risk for dysphagia.
- Improving adherence to sepsis bundle diagnostics and interpretation
- Strategies to manage and decrease health care provider injuries due to accidents and/or assaults
- Strategies to increase percentage of certified RNs
- Other innovative/creative ideas
Clinical Application Presentation Rubric
This will be the main element in the instructor’s evaluation of your project . Your reflection
| Competency | Excellent 15-20 | Acceptable 8-14 | Not Acceptable 0-7 | Points Achieved |
| Current clinical practice issue for change (policy, procedure, or innovation) is addressed. (EPSLO 1,2, 3, 4, 5) | There is strong evidence of a need’s assessment discussion backed by credible literature (10 references) to support the clinical practice change in the presentation. | There is some evidence of a need’s assessment discussion backed by credible literature (5-8) to support the clinical practice change in the presentation. | There is little to no evidence of a need’s assessment discussion backed by credible literature (2 or less) to support the clinical practice change in the presentation. | /40 |
| Competency | Excellent 10-15 | Acceptable 6-9 | Not Acceptable 0-5 | Points Achieved |
| The process for implementation of the change is presented fully. (EPSLO 2, 3, 4, 5) | There is evidence in the presentation discussion of multiple stakeholder communications, budgetary implications, staff education plan, strategies/theory for change, timeframe, and interventions. | There is some evidence in the presentation discussion of multiple stakeholder communications, budgetary implications, staff education plan, strategies/theory for change, timeframe, and interventions, but one or more components are not fully developed. | There is little to no evidence in the presentation discussion of multiple stakeholder communications, budgetary implications, staff education plan, strategies/theory for change, timeframe, and interventions. Multiple components are not fully developed or addressed. | /60 |
| The teaching tool is fully developed and address possible roadblocks for implementation. (EPSLO 1,2, 3, 4, 5) | There is evidence of a usable teaching tool that can be presented to the stakeholders who will be involved with the change process. Possible roadblocks to change are addressed in the presentation. | There is some evidence of a usable teaching tool that can be presented to the stakeholders who will be involved with the change process. Only one or minimal roadblocks to change are addressed in the presentation. | There is little to no evidence of a usable teaching tool that can be presented to the stakeholders who will be involved with the change process (not presented or difficult to understand). No feasible roadblocks to change are addressed in the presentation. | /30 |
| The conclusion summarizes the high points of the presentation and critically evaluates why the change is supported by the need’s assessment, implementation evidence, and teaching tool despite possible roadblocks. (EPSLO 5) | There is evidence of a summary conclusion that supports the change proposed with the evidence, including critical thinking on the need’s assessment, the teaching tool, and describes possible roadblocks and how to overcome them. | There is some evidence of a summary conclusion with a few valid points that supports the change proposed from the evidence, including some critical thinking on the need’s assessment, the teaching tool, and describes possible roadblocks and how to overcome them. One significant piece is missing or not fully addressed. | There is little to no evidence of a summary conclusion with a no real valid points that supports the change proposed from the evidence, including some critical thinking on the need’s assessment, the teaching tool, and describes possible roadblocks and how to overcome them. Multiple significant pieces are missing or not fully addressed. | /30 |
| Evidence of Student RN to BSN Journey and nursing philosophy goals are apparent. Self and/or peer review are included. (EPSLO 2, 5) | Well defined discussion of student RN to BSN journey and philosophy goals are apparent with introspective discussion and remark based on how the program has impacted or changed the overall nursing philosophy. The self and peer review are included. | Brief discussion of student RN to BSN journey and goals presented. Little to no introspective discussion or remark based on how the program impacted or changed initial nursing philosophy. The self or peer review may be missing or incomplete. | No or inadequate discussion of student RN to BSN journey and goals presented. No philosophical discussion. No self or peer review included. | /10 |
| Competency | Excellent 8-10 | Acceptable 4-7 | Not Acceptable 0-3 | Points Achieved |
| References are supportive of submission content, peer-reviewed , reflect evidence based care practices, initially published within the past 5 years | References (>/=9) are supportive of submission content, peer-reviewed , reflect evidence based care practices, initially published within the past 5 years | References (>/=6) supportive of submission content, peer-reviewed , reflect evidence based care practices, initially published within the past 5 years | Fewerthta 5 references or do not meet several listed criteria | /10 |
| Grammar, spelling, and punctuation (EPSLO 2) | There are no errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation | There are a few minor errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that do not detract from the clarity of presentation | There are major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that may detract from the clarity of presentation | /10 |
| APA Compliance (EPSLO 2) | The paper meets 7th ed. APA formatting guidelines | There are < 5 APA format errors | There are >5 errors in format and references | /10 |
| Totals | /200 | |||
Reflection
Project quality is be assessed on the basis of these 6 criteria. Please note your perception of each item on the basis of strong points (items you perceive as important contributors to positive patient outcomes or quality of the care environment. You do not need to make entries in every line item in Criterion 1 nor write extensive analyses. This is intended for you to spontaneously recognize the contributions you are starting to make to nursing and those you may make in the future! (estimated time to be spent ~15-20 minutes)
| SCIENTIFIC QUALITY The extent to which a proposal has a ground-breaking nature and ambition (excellence). |
| RELEVANCE The extent to which the objectives of a proposal are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs, global priorities and partners’ and donors’ policies. |
| EFFECTIVENESS The extent to which the proposals’ objectives are expected to be achieved, considering their relative importance. |
| EFFICIENCY A measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are converted to results. |
| IMPACT Potential positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by the proposal, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. |
| SUSTAINABILITY The continuation of benefits after the activities have been completed. |
| Title of the project proposal: |
| Criterion 1: Assess the scientific quality of the project proposal | ||
| Describe the strong and weak points of the project proposal in terms of | Strong points (+) | Warrants additional study (-) |
| Level of innovation, creativity (excellence) | ||
| Strategic research/education needs and opportunities | ||
| Research/education strategies of partners | ||
| Appropriate methodology | ||
| The partner(s) has(ve) sufficient technical expertise and experience (knowledge of the issues to be addressed) to successfully deliver all expected results of the project | ||
| Criterion 2: Assess the relevance of the project proposal. | |
| Needs analysis | |
| Contribution to national/area healthcare strategic and partner priorities | |
| Criterion 3: Assess the effectiveness of the project proposal. | |
| Strong points (feasibility) | |
| Weak points | |
| Criterion 4: Assess the efficiency of the project proposal. | |
| Strong points | |
| Weak points | |
| Criterion 5: Assess the impact of the project proposal. | |
| Strong points | |
| Weak points | |
| Criterion 6: Assess the sustainability of the project proposal. | |
| Strong points | |
| Weak points | |
| Final assessment (motivation, possible roadblocks, and teaching tool supporting the general assessment as described above, no scoring) : | |
