Share your quality projects for sure! You learned from them & so can the larger community. Make your voice heard.
Let below encourage you to encourage you to publish, present, disseminate your quality improvement projects!!
Davidoff & Batalden in 2005 wrote these words that still apply today:
In contrast with the primary goals of science, which are to discover and disseminate new knowledge, the primary goal of improvement is to change performance. Unfortunately, scholarly accounts of the methods, experiences, and results of most medical quality improvement work are not published, either in print or electronic form. In our view this failure to publish is a serious deficiency: it limits the available evidence on efficacy, prevents critical scrutiny, deprives staff of the opportunity and incentive to clarify thinking, slows dissemination of established improvements, inhibits discovery of innovations, and compromises the ethical obligation to return valuable information to the public.The reasons for this failure are many: competing service responsibilities of and lack of academic rewards for improvement staff; editors’ and peer reviewers’ unfamiliarity with improvement goals and methods; and lack of publication guidelines that are appropriate for rigorous, scholarly improvement work. We propose here a draft set of guidelines designed to help with writing, reviewing, editing, interpreting, and using such reports. We envisage this draft as the starting point for collaborative development of more definitive guidelines. We suggest that medical quality improvement will not reach its full potential unless accurate and transparent reports of improvement work are published frequently and widely.
Critical thinking: What is a QI project on your unit in which others might be interested? Sketch out an outline using headings recommended here: http://ocpd.med.umich.edu/moc-qi/presenting-publishing-qi
For more Info see Davidoff & Batalden. (2005). Toward stronger evidnece on quality improvment. Draft publication guidelines: the beginning of a consensus project. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 14, 319-32. doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.014787
How strong is the evidence regarding our holiday Santa Claus (SC) practices? And what are the opportunities on this SC topic for new descriptive, correlation, or experimental research? Although existing evidence generally supports SC, in the end we may conclude, “the most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see” (Church, as cited in Newseum, n.d.).
If you want to know the answers, check out: Highfield, M.E.F. (2011). Here comes Santa Claus: What’s the evidence? Advanced Emergency Nursing Journal, 33(4), 354-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1097/TME.0b013e318234ead3 Using bona fide published work, the article shows you how to evaluate the strength of evidence and how to apply it to practice. You can request a full-text for your personal use from your library or from the author via www.researchgate.net/home .
Critical thinking: Check out this related research study with fulltext available through PubMed: Black Pete through the eyes of Dutch children
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27322583 ). Write a follow-up research question based on the findings of this study & post in comments below.
For more info: For those unfamiliar with ResearchGate, it is a site where you can track authors who publish in your area of interest, and you can set up your own profile so that people can track your work. Take a look.
In the last post we compared stronger direct measures of outcomes with weaker indirect
measures of project outcomes.
So…what direct measures are you “baking into your project cake”? What do you hope will be your project outcome & what measurement will show that you achieved it? –pain scores? weight? skin integrity? patient reports of a sound night’s sleep? Share your story. Help others learn.
Or if you just stuck with HCAHPS (or other) as outcome measure, explain why that was the best choice for your project. (Maybe in your case it was a direct measure!)
For More Info on direct vs. indirect measures & Critical thinking: Check out t Direct speaking about INdirect outcomes: HCAHPS as a measurement
Join the Honor Society of Nursing, Sigma Theta Tau International and more than 2,000 of your peers in Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, 28 October – 1 November 2017, for the 44th Biennial Convention. Experience STTI’s largest event, which features more than 800 oral and poster presentations, networking opportunities, and more.
Call for Abstracts
Opportunities are now available to submit abstracts for the 44th Biennial Convention.
Submission Deadline: 9 November 2016.
For more information: http://www.nursingsociety.org/connect-engage/meetings-events/biennial-convention/call-for-abstracts
Below is my adaptation of one of the clearest representations that I have ever seen of when the roads diverge into quality improvement, evidence-based practice, & research. Well done, Dr. E.Schenk PhD MHI, RN-BC!
Evidence-based practice = best available evidence + expert clinical judgment + patient & family values/preferences.
When clinicians diagnose & treat based on outdated or inadequate knowledge, then outcomes are at best uncertain. The internet itself is a poor information source; & colleagues may be no more up-to-date that you.
Good sources are the world-wide Cochrane Collaboration and the specific evidence-based practice journals that are beginning to grow–these take best information from the research report all the way through clinical recommendations. For research reports per se, PubMed is a comprehensive, U.S. tax-supported database; & there when you find information that fits using your key search terms, you can also look for related articles & get full-text through interlibrary loan or online. Another strategy is take the article that fits your clinical issue to your librarian, and ask for help in finding more research on the identical clinical issue.
While no one can read everything in the literature, everyone can read something. You can do a focused review on any particular problem.
Critical thinking: Is there a clinical issue that you think could use a better solution? Plug related words into PubMed & see what you can learn.
For more information see fulltext at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC226388/
The public and lots of nurses have lots of questions. Our evidence-based knowledge is evolving. Here’s some of the latest (Aug/July 2016).
You can set up a free account with Lippincott to access this 3 page article that translates current research into practice for you.
O’Malley – Zika virus: What we know and do not know: http://www.nursingcenter.com/pdfjournal?AID=3570052&an=00002800-201607000-00005&Journal_ID=54033&Issue_ID=3569996