NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention

NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention

Name

Capella University

NURS-FPX 8035 Foundations of Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing

Prof. Name

Date

Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention

Introduction to PICOT in Healthcare

The PICOT framework is essential for addressing critical questions in healthcare research. It stands for Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time. In this article, we will revisit a specific PICOT question: In hospitalized patients (P), does the implementation of incident reporting (I), compared to the absence of such reporting (C), enhance patient safety (O) within a six-month period (T)? This inquiry builds on the research conducted by Petschnig and Haslinger-Baumann (2017), which explores the effectiveness of incident reporting systems in improving patient safety.

Understanding the Components of the PICOT Question

The PICOT components are delineated as follows:

• P (Patients): Refers to individuals admitted to the hospital.
• I (Intervention): Involves the establishment of an incident reporting system.
• C (Comparison): Highlights the scenario without incident reporting.
• O (Outcome): Focuses on improved patient safety metrics.
• T (Time): The designated study period of six months.

This framework is vital for evaluating the effectiveness of evidence-based practices (EBP) in healthcare settings.

Desired Outcomes of the Intervention

The primary goal of the incident reporting system is to eliminate patient, nurse, and staff injuries within the hospital environment. This includes preventing falls, medication errors, and allergy incidents. In a preliminary assessment, data indicated three incidents of patient falls and two allergy-related reports due to medication errors in 2018. The following year, 2019, recorded four patient falls, one nurse injury, and one staff treatment incident. However, after the implementation of the incident reporting system in 2020, the results were promising: there were no patient falls and only one incident of an allergy due to a medication error. This marked a significant improvement, showcasing a 100% reduction in patient falls and a 50% decrease in allergic reactions compared to 2019. Notably, there were no reports of staff or nurse injuries in 2020, underscoring the intervention’s effectiveness during its initial year (Petschnig & Haslinger-Baumann, 2017).

Continuing the Intervention Plan

The intervention is designed to last for three months, emphasizing the importance of continuous evaluation through evidence-based practice (EBP) principles. To effectively measure the intervention’s success, specific metrics must be established for ongoing data collection. Key performance indicators (KPIs) include:

• The frequency of incidents reported per week.
• The average response time for each reported incident.

By meticulously planning these metrics, we ensure that all aspects of the intervention are adequately covered. The parameters for data collection will include the incident category, personnel response time, incident duration, individuals recording the incidents, and patient demographics such as age and gender. Regular reporting—whether weekly, monthly, or annually—will facilitate the identification of both short-term and long-term trends, aiding in informed decision-making and necessary corrective actions.

Strategies for Sustaining the Intervention

For any new intervention to succeed, it is crucial to garner comprehensive support from management. The cornerstone of sustaining this evidence-based practice (EBP) lies in proactive management engagement with the staff. According to Carlfjord et al. (2018), management should conduct strategy sessions that involve nurses, physicians, and other staff members. Engaging them through regular meetings allows for the incorporation of their insights and experiences into the improvement process, significantly contributing to the intervention’s long-term success.

Conclusion

In summary, the implementation of an incident reporting system in hospitals holds significant promise for enhancing patient safety. The initial findings indicate a substantial reduction in incidents, affirming the importance of continued evaluation and staff involvement in sustaining improvements. By utilizing the PICOT framework, healthcare facilities can effectively assess and refine their practices, ultimately leading to safer environments for patients and staff alike.

References

Carlfjord, S., Ohrn, A., & Gunnarsson, A. (2018). Experiences from ten years of incident reporting in health care: A qualitative study among department managers and coordinators. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1-9.

NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention

Petschnig, W., & Haslinger-Baumann, E. (2017). Critical Incident Reporting System (CIRS): A fundamental component of risk management in health care systems to enhance patient safety. Safety in Health, 3(1), 1-16.

Appendix

In response to feedback received from previous reports, I have made several adjustments. For instance, APA guidelines recommend spelling out numbers below ten, so I have revised all single-digit numbers accordingly. Additionally, I have ensured that journal titles are capitalized and that “et al.” is correctly used when citing works with three authors. My strengths lie in data gathering and analysis for improvement, while I am actively addressing my weaknesses in planning, as identified through feedback.

By consistently applying these strategies and insights, we can foster a culture of safety and continuous improvement in healthcare settings.