NURS 8114 Translation of Evidence and Application DQ

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NURS 8114 Translation of Evidence and Application DQ

NURS 8114 Translation of Evidence and Application DQ

Based on your work in previous modules, you will wrap up the course with a Discussion on challenges in
translating and applying evidence to implement a quality improvement initiative. Draw on your
experience in your current or previous health care settings to consider specific barriers to address and
opportunities to leverage in advocating for evidence-based practice quality improvement.

Photo Credit: steheap / Adobe Stock
To prepare:
 Review the readings in the White, Dudley-Brown, and Terhaar text. With your current health
care organization, or an organization you are targeting for your DNP Project, in mind, consider
the area(s) of greatest challenge with regard to translating and applying evidence for a practice
change initiative, e.g., leadership, technology, collaboration, stakeholder buy-in. Focus on the
relevant text chapter(s) in your Discussion preparation.
 Consider theories and best practice recommendations for addressing your identified challenges
and barriers to translating and applying evidence that would support practice change initiatives.
 Reflect on the philosophy of nursing practice that you developed in Modules 1–2. Consider your
role as a DNP in creating an organizational culture that embraces evidence-based practice and
quality improvement.
With these thoughts in mind …
By Day 3 of Week 11
Post an explanation of the challenges and barriers to translating and applying evidence for practice
change in your target health care organization. Briefly explain your issue(s) of concern and describe
specific approaches for addressing these challenges. Explain how you view your role as a DNP in creating
a health care culture that promotes translation of evidence for quality improvement and explain why.
Then, recommend actions and activities you could model and lead, including through an EBP QI project,
to advocate for quality improvement and social change in nursing. Be specific and provide examples.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ posts.
By Day 6 of Week 11
Respond to at least two colleagues on 2 different days by suggesting other theories, strategies, ideas,
and/or best practices for addressing the challenges and barriers they identify. Also agree or disagree
with their view of the DNP’s role in creating a culture that enables translation of evidence and support
your reasoning, including with other actions that promote a culture that embraces translation of
evidence. Cite sources to support your posts and to recommend to colleagues.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view
and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the "Post to Discussion Question" link and
then select "Create Thread" to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you

cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully
before clicking on Submit!
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:
Week 11 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 11 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 11

To Participate in this Discussion:
Week 11 Discussion

What's Coming Up?
Congratulations! After you have finished all of the assignments for this week, you have completed the
course. Please submit your Course Evaluation by Day 7.
Week 11: Translation and Application of Evidence
Imagine approaching this genial group of professionals to discuss a practice change initiative in their
health care setting. How do you anticipate they would respond? How many would quickly lose the
smile? How many would be interested but uncertain? How many eager to get started?
Translating evidence into action for quality improvement can be a particular hurdle, depending on the
people and problems involved. However, as a DNP promoting evidence-based practice to improve
patient care and outcomes, it is part of the process to anticipate the barriers and be willing to address
them. Consider your own experience with change-makers in health care or other areas of importance to
you. Advocacy is not always appreciated or welcomed, which is why it is so necessary to be prepared for
pushback and be armed with strong evidence.
In this final week, think ahead to the realities of promoting practice change and the DNP role in creating
an organizational culture that embraces translation and application of evidence for quality
improvement.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Analyze challenges and barriers to the translation of evidence in health care organizations

 Recommend approaches to increasing translation and application of evidence for quality
improvement in health care organizations
 Justify the DNP role in creating an organizational culture that enables translation and application
of evidence for quality improvement
 Recommend advocacy and social change efforts for nursing practice through evidence-based
practice quality improvement projects

Learning Resources

Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (Eds.). (2019). Translation of evidence into nursing and
healthcare (3rd ed.). Springer.
 Chapter 15, “Interprofessional Collaboration and Teamwork for Translation” (pp. 299–314)
 Chapter 16, “Creating a Culture That Promotes Translation” (pp. 315–334)
 Chapter 17, “Best Practices in Translation: Challenges and Barriers in Translation” (pp. 337–346)
Note: Read one or more of the following chapters based on the focus of your Discussion post:
 Chapter 5, “Translation of Evidence for Improving Quality and Safety” (pp. 103–123) (Review
from Week 10)
 Chapter 6, “Translation of Evidence for Leadership” (pp. 125–147)
 Chapter 14, “Information Technology: A Foundation for Translation” (pp. 287–298)
Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Name: NURS_8114_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

Exit

 Grid View
 List View
Excellent
90%–100%

Good
80%–89%

Fair
70%–79%

Poor
0%–69%

Main Posting: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the

Response to the Discussion
question is reflective with
critical analysis and synthesis
representative of knowledge
gained from the course
readings for the module and
current credible sources.

Discussion question(s).
Is reflective with critical analysis
and synthesis representative of
knowledge gained from the
course readings for the module
and current credible sources.
No less than 75% of post has
exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three
current credible sources.

Discussion question(s).
Is somewhat reflective with
critical analysis and synthesis
representative of knowledge
gained from the course readings
for the module.
50% of the post has exceptional
depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three
credible references.

Discussion question(s).
One to two criteria are not
addressed or are superficially
addressed.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8114 Translation of Evidence and Application DQ

Is somewhat lacking reflection
and critical analysis and
synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge
gained from the course readings
for the module.
Cited with fewer than two
credible references.

Discussion question(s). 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
references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely.
Contains no grammatical or
spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA manual
writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely.
May contain one to two
grammatical or spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA manual
writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely.
May contain more than two
spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting
errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
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 Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.
Posts main Discussion by due
date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Meets requirements for full
participation.
Posts main Discussion by due
date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main Discussion by due
date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for
full participation.
Does not post main Discussion
by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague's main post
that is reflective and justified
with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical
thinking and application to
practice settings.
Responds to questions posed by
faculty.
The use of scholarly sources to
support ideas demonstrates
synthesis and understanding of

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and
may exhibit critical thinking or
application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may
have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic
and lacks depth.

learning objectives.

First Response:
Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional
and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions
are fully 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.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly
professional and respectful to
colleagues.
Response to faculty questions
are mostly answered, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas that
are supported by few credible
sources.
Response is written in standard,
edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the
Discussion may lack effective
professional communication.
Response to faculty questions
are somewhat answered, if
posed.
Few or no credible sources are
cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the
Discussion lack effective
communication.
Response to faculty questions
are missing.
No credible sources are cited.

First Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.
Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full
participation.
Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for
full participation.
Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague's main post
that is reflective and justified
with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical
thinking and application to
practice settings.
Responds to questions posed by
faculty.
The use of scholarly sources to
support ideas demonstrates
synthesis and understanding of
learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and
may exhibit critical thinking or
application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic and may
have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic
and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional
and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions
are fully answered, if posed.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly
professional and respectful to
colleagues.
Response to faculty questions
are mostly answered, if posed.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the
Discussion may lack effective
professional communication.
Response to faculty questions
are somewhat answered, if

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the
Discussion lack effective
communication.
Response to faculty questions
are missing.

Provides clear, concise opinions
and ideas that are supported by
two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in
standard, edited English.

Provides opinions and ideas that
are supported by few credible
sources.
Response is written in standard,
edited English.

posed.
Few or no credible sources are
cited.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely,
full, and active participation.
Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full
participation.
Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for
full participation.
Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_8114_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.