Topic: Prevention of Falls in Hospital Settings
Due tomorrow at 10 pm Chicago time (07/22/2022).
Please follow the rubric and check the sample out too
Students submit two drafts of their CAP paper during the term. The student’s clinical instructor reviews the drafts and provides feedback. Each draft earns a maximum of 5 points. Consult the “CAP Instructions and Rubric” document for guidance on content.
1st draft contains:
· Literature review of the topic/issue
The first draft includes proper APA-styled citations for the articles referenced. It does NOT need to include an APA-styled title page; however, this is a requirement for the final paper.
2nd draft contains:
· Literature review of the solution/interventions
The second draft includes proper APA-styled citations for the articles referenced.
· These drafts are an opportunity for the instructor to tell the student if they are on the right track for content, writing, and formatting.
· The drafts are not an opportunity to receive detailed corrections on content and APA style.
Students are encouraged to seek writing/APA assistance from the APA Publication Manual, ResU’s lib guides, the Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue, or through the TutorMe resource found on the landing page of Brightspace.
CAP drafts will be assessed using the following criteria. Late submissions will lose up to 10% for every day submitted past the due date.
4-5 points: very good/good
Draft follows all instructions; includes the required content contained in the CAP rubric. Writing is cohesive. Draft may have one or two deficiencies in completeness, content, writing mechanics, or APA format.
3 points: average
Draft follows most instructions; includes most of the required content contained in the CAP rubric. Writing may need improvement. Draft has three or four deficiencies in content, writing mechanics, or APA format.
1-2 points: deficient
Assignment is submitted but does not follow directions, lacks content, and/or is incomplete.
0 points: Nothing submitted
FAMILY-CENTERED CARE DURING OUTPATIENT SURGERY 1
FAMILY-CENTERED CARE DURING OUTPATIENT SURGERY 2
This sample paper gives students an idea of how to address the content of the CAP. Please be sure to focus on the content and not the formatting. This paper has not been updated to reflect the 7th edition APA rules! See side notes in the margins.
Family-Centered Communication in Day Surgery
Three Quality of Care key drivers for Our Lady of the Resurrection (OLR) Medical Center’s Surgical Services department are measured quarterly. The Surgical Services Department has met or exceeded targets for two of the three key drivers. However, for the past six months, the department has not met the goal for a third key driver: explanations provided about progress following surgery. Meeting the goal for the third key driver is dependent on effective communication processes from staff and surgeons to patients and their families. A communication process exists, but by looking at areas in which the process is broken, relatively easy and effective fixes can be put into place. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Topic introduction, overview of issue, choice of topic.
The charge nurse for preoperative and recovery care has identified difficulty in adhering to the current process due to difficulty in locating family members if they leave the waiting room and due to the volume and acuity of patients that enter the recovery area. The nurse manager has also identified meeting the third key driver as a priority for the institution and supports the project. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Pertinence of issue to the unit and preceptor and unit manager buy-in
Increasing patient satisfaction—and thereby increasing the likelihood of returning to the facility for healthcare needs—can benefit the unit and the organization by increasing revenues. The profession of nursing can also benefit by increasing staff and improving technologies for patient care with additional revenues. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Benefit to the unit/organization
Literature Review of Problem
Much research on factors influencing patient satisfaction in perioperative care has been conducted. A driving factor identified is communication to patients and families during care.
Yellen (2003) surveyed ambulatory surgery patients to determine the influence of the nurse-sensitive variables of age, gender, culture, previous hospital admissions, nurse communication, pain, and satisfaction with pain management on overall patient satisfaction. Results showed that nurse communication was the most significant indicator of patient satisfaction, and satisfaction with pain management was the second most significant indicator. Furthermore, patients who were satisfied with nurse communication also reported satisfaction with pain management.
Fry and Warren (2005) conducted a qualitative study to determine the needs of family members in the waiting room of a critical care unit. Results showed that all participants sought some information about the patient’s outcomes during the stay. In addition, an element of trust was essential to a family member’s sense of well-being, especially with nurses. The study concluded that an environment that supports a nurse’s interaction with patients and families enhances trust. Conversely, a lack of information or trust of nurses can reduce a sense of well-being and, ultimately, patient satisfaction.
Literature Review of Solution
Implementing a family-centered communication process during surgery can take many forms. The approach can be as formal as a nurse liaison whose only job is to communicate with and to families during surgery or as informal as periodic phone call updates.
The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia implemented a Family Liaison Model that utilized current staff to communicate to families during operative procedures with subsequent admission to a cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). A CICU nurse was designated family liaison during surgery. Duties included 1) meeting the patient and family in the holding area, 2) escorting the family to the waiting area, reviewing with the family what they can expect, 3) obtaining updates from OR staff every 45-60 minutes, 4) relaying progress information to the families in the waiting area, 5) admitting the child to the CICU, 6) ensuring the family could be at bedside within 35-40 minutes post-op, and 7) providing care until the end of shift. Patient satisfaction with staff and nursing support increased over a two-year period. However, 96% of nurses found time management with the additional duties challenging (Madigan, Donaghue, & Carpenter, 1999).
The University of Virginia Health System implemented phone calls to families every two hours during surgery to provide updates. A follow-up study on the program’s effectiveness revealed that 95% of families who received the calls reported a “good OR experience,” while only 84% of the families who didn’t receive phone calls rated the experience favorably (University of Virginia Health System, 2008).
The solution proposed for OLR will be a modified combination of the two solutions reviewed. These modifications are necessary because of cost limitations, OLR nurse workloads, and OLR environmental restrictions that do not allow support people to be with families in pre-op and recovery. Similarities to the solution used at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia will be setting expectations of the patient’s family members through a new brochure, using current nursing staff, and relaying information in a timely manner. The primary mode of communication to families will be through telephone contact, similar to the solution implemented at the University of Virginia Health System. Obtaining cell phone information from families on a consistent basis is another significant modification.
The solution to the problem involves enhancing the current process at four key communication opportunities. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Description of intervention.
During outpatient registration, obtaining the family’s cell number is inconsistent and expectations during surgery are set verbally. The enhanced process involves developing a brochure which informs families what to expect during the patient’s perioperative experience, and it offers them an opportunity to provide their contact information to the nurse in writing. The contact information would be attached to the front of the chart.
In preoperative holding, delays sometimes take place, and the current process does not include communication to families about delays. The enhanced process requires the preoperative nurse to make a phone call if delays longer than 45 minutes occur.
If the family leaves the waiting room for any reason, surgeon contact with the families following surgery may not take place. With the family-provided cell phone contact information on the front of the chart, the surgeon has the option of calling the family to update them about the patient.
During recovery, the volume and acuity of patients sometimes prevents recovery nurses from updating families. The enhanced process will enable the surgical and recovery room nurses to work collaboratively in deciding which nursing role should complete the task for each patient.
Changes to the family communication process during the perioperative period will start with development and approval of the brochure. The roll-out schedule would be contingent on completion of the brochure, but it should be done as soon as possible. The unit manager and charge nurses in all phases of care will schedule and conduct in-services about the new process for all nurses in perioperative services. In addition, the unit manager will document the new process and display reminders of it prominently at the nurses’ stations and the breakroom. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Rollout and timeline.
To measure the effectiveness of the new process, pre-intervention, baseline data for the Quality of Care key drivers will be compared to post-intervention data three months after implementation. A small standing committee of nurses will analyze data and patient comments every three months to determine if refinements to the process are needed. Comment by Carina Piccinini: Measurement of effectiveness.
Family-centered communication processes have been proven to increase patient satisfaction and will improve the explanations of progress during surgery, which is a Quality of Care key driver. This new process allows for family mobility during surgery while still maintaining contact with staff, which has been a problem in the past. Enhancing current processes is cost-effective, and it eliminates the need for retraining to entirely new processes. Also, this process ensures that no one nursing role is overburdened with communication responsibilities to families. Comment by Carina Piccinini: How the new process will improve the clinical issue
Description : The Clinical Application Project (CAP) is an opportunity for the BSN student to identify an issue, topic, or challenge that is relevant to their Role Transition clinical placement. The student will examine the research related to their topic and investigate the literature regarding a potential solution for, or intervention to improve, the issue. The student then creates a final project, intervention, or solution to their identified topic. They will present their work in a professional paper and electronic poster which will be presented via video.
Step-by-step directions :
1. Identify a problem, issue, concern, or area for improvement relevant to your clinical setting. Consult with your RN preceptor and ResU clinical faculty regarding your topic. Your clinical faculty must approve the topic before work is initiated.
2. Educate yourself about the importance of your topic to nursing and your particular clinical placement. Whenever possible, you will want to include facts, statistics etc. relevant to your
3. Critically analyze the literature related to the area of concern.
4. Identify possible solutions to the selected area of concern, based on the evidence in the literature.
5. Review each for its strengths, weaknesses, and feasibility.
6. Select one solution.
7. Engage in the necessary work for this quality improvement project (e.g., develop a new form and identify approvals required for its use). Although students may not have enough time to actually implement their entire project or quality improvement activity, the final work product should clearly outline the plan for implementation, including a timeline. Students will provide evidence of their work by submitting the product of their (e.g., educational program outline, instructional pamphlet, nursing form, pocket resource, new policy, patient or family focused education, etc.)
The student will create an electronic poster which visually represents the clinical application project. The e-poster displays similar components as the paper, but in a very concise and visually pleasing design. Further guidelines and instructions for the e-poster are included in the document entitled “e-Poster Creation”.
The final paper and electronic poster are graded according to the specifics contained in the following grading rubric. Due to the pandemic, e-poster presentations will not take place on campus. Instead, students will present via video and upload to Brightspace.
CAP Instructions and Rubric
|Grading criteria for PAPER||Points||Comments|
· Introduces topic and provides overview of the issue (2 pts.)
· Discusses why this issue is pertinent to the particular unit/organization and what led student to choose the topic (2 pts.)
· Identifies unit, manager, etc. support for the project (1 pt.)
· Identifies how the project will specifically benefit the unit/organization (2 pts.)
|Literature review: topic/issue |
· Includes two recent articles (less than 5-7 years) from professional nursing or health sciences journals (2 pts.)
· For each article: provides brief summary and discusses how the article is pertinent and relevant to the topic/issue (4 pts./each article=8 total)
|Literature review: solution/intervention |
· Includes two recent (less than 5-7 years) articles from professional nursing or health sciences journals (2 pts.)
· For each article: provides brief summary and discusses how the article is pertinent and relevant to the solution or interventions (4 pts./each article=8 total)
· Articles support the student’s chosen solution or intervention (2 pts.)
· Clearly describes final project or intervention (2 pts.)
· Outlines specific steps to implement final project/solution, including timeline for how the project could be “rolled out” (4 pts.)
· Discusses how the project will address/improve the clinical issue (2 pts.)
· Discusses future follow-up, evaluation, and/or measurement of the impact of the project (3 pts.)
|Paper mechanics |
· Incorporates required content in a 4-5-page paper (not including title page and reference page) (2 pts.)
· Follows correct APA:
· Proper title page (1 pt.)
· Appropriate text spacing, font size, headings, and in-text citations (2 pts.)
· Formatted reference page (2 pts.)
· Writes clearly; uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation; avoids first person voice (3 pts.)
|Grading criteria for e-POSTER||Points||Comments|
· Clearly displays the topic or issue (2 pts.)
· Includes general information about the topic or issue
(2 pts.) *
· Communicates specifics about why it is pertinent to the particular unit or organization (2 pts.) *
· States institutional support (1 pt.)
*If applicable, poster uses appropriate graphic or visual which conveys national or local data, trends, organization or unit statistics, etc.
|Literature review of the topic/issue |
· Includes literature support of the topic or issue (1 pt.)
· Summarizes most important point(s) of each article (4 pts.)
· Clearly connects authors with literature points (1 pt.)
· Clearly outlines solution and presents as feasible (3 pts.)
· Includes literature support of chosen solution (2 pt.)
· Clearly connects authors with solution literature (1 pt.)
· Identifies and explains final project and attaches a copy of “work product” (in-service handouts, pamphlet, form, pocket card, for example) (4 pts.)
· Specifically describes how the final project would be implemented, including timeline for “roll-out” (2 pts.)
· Describes how the impact of the project could be measured or evaluated (2)
· Addresses the future implications of the project for the unit and/or nursing in general (2 pts.)
|e-Poster mechanics |
· Professional looking: follows elements of e-poster construction; organized and clear layout that flows well (2 pts.)
· Visually appealing: words and graphics are easy to see; appropriate use of color (2 pts.)
· Student’s name, Resurrection University and project site are clearly identified (1 pt.)
· Reference page is complete, in proper APA format, and submitted with the e-poster (1 pt.)