NURS 8302 Identifying Practice Gaps for Quality Improvement DQ

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

NURS 8302 Identifying Practice Gaps for Quality Improvement DQ

NURS 8302 Identifying Practice Gaps for Quality Improvement DQ

What should be happening in practice? What is happening or observed in practice?
These two questions help to identify where quality improvement practice gaps might
exist in nursing practice. If we know what should be happening does not coincide with
what is happening, we know there is an issue, or more appropriately, a practice gap.

Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

A practice gap is the difference between a desirable or achievable state of practice and current
reality. For example, a common gap in practice in healthcare organizations today, are healthcare
associated infections (HAIs), such as central line associated blood stream infections (CLABSIs),
or catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs).
The ongoing identification of practice gaps is critical to quality improvement and involves
identifying the current state, comparing that current state to the desired state, identifying the
causes of the gaps in practice, and validating those gaps to develop a process for improvement.
For this Discussion, reflect on quality improvement practice gaps that may exist in your practice
or organization. Consider what quality improvement methods and/or tools might be useful in
improving this practice gap. Then, think about how you might address these challenges and what
strategies you might implement as a future DNP-prepared nurse.
To Prepare:
 Review the Learning Resources on tools and methods for quality improvement.
 Reflect on a potential quality improvement practice gap, you have seen in your practice
or organization, which you might consider using for your DNP project.
 Consider the tools and methods you might use to address this quality improvement
practice gap.
By Day 3 of Week 3
Post a brief explanation of how you would identify a quality improvement practice gap in your
practice or organization. Describe a potential quality improvement practice gap you might use
for your DNP project, and explain why. Then, explain at least two types of tools and/or methods
you might use to address this quality improvement practice gap, and explain why. Be specific
and provide examples.
By Day 6 of Week 3

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues
on two different days by expanding upon your colleague’s post and suggesting alternative tools
and/or methods your colleague might consider using to address the quality improvement practice
gap they selected.
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 3 Discussion Rubric

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

To Participate in this Discussion:
Week 3 Discussion
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: NURS_8302_Week3_Discussion_Rubric
 Grid View
 List View
Excellent
90–100

Good
80–89

Fair
70–79

Poor
: 0–69

Main Posting:

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.

Points Range: 40
(40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly
responds to the
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.

Points Range: 35
(35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most
of the 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.

Points Range: 31
(31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some
of the Discussion
question(s).
One to two
criteria are not
addressed or are
superficially
addressed.
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.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond
to the 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

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

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

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

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 8302 Identifying Practice Gaps for Quality Improvement DQ

Points Range: 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: Points Range: 9
(9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets

Points Range: 8
(8%) – 8 (8%)
Meets

Points Range: 7
(7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet

Timely and full
participation

requirements for
timely, full, and
active
participation.
Posts main
Discussion by due
date.

requirements for
full participation.
Posts main
Discussion by due
date.

Discussion by due
date.

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.

Points Range: 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.

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

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

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

First Response:
Writing

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

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

Response is
effectively written
in standard, edited
English.

Response is
written in
standard, edited
English.

First Response:
Timely and full
participation

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

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

Points Range: 3
(3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 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.

Points Range: 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.

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

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

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

Second
Response:
Writing

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

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

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

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

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.

Few or no
credible sources
are cited.

Second
Response:
Timely and full
participation

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

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

Points Range: 3
(3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.

Points Range: 0
(0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet
requirements for
full participation.
Does not

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