Enhancing Patient Safety Through Evidence-Based Practice

Introduction

In healthcare facilities, patient security and high-quality treatment are of utmost importance. Care providers can only do their best if they can pinpoint and fix the problems affecting their patients’ results. The purpose of this document is to serve as a guide for using EBP tactics to address a problem with service quality or patient safety. Change can be successfully implemented with the help of the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation (Khalil & Kynoch, 2021). The PICOT framework will be used to define the EBP project’s scope, and a wide range of stakeholders, including members of an interprofessional team, will be identified. In addition, this publication will present a detailed action plan for enactment within the clinical practice setting, outlining the evidence gained and recommending changes (Patelarou et al., 2022).

Change model overview

Overview of the star model of knowledge transformation

Clinical evidence-based practice can be more easily integrated with the help of the complete Star Model of Knowledge Transformation. This methodology offers a systematic strategy for turning evidence into practical behaviors, with its five separate stages being the following: discovery, evidence summary, translation, integration, and evaluation. The Evidence Summary phase follows the Discovery phase, during which relevant research and evidence are identified, synthesized, and summarizes the results. The suggestions and guidelines derived from the evidence emphasize the Translation stage, while their incorporation into clinical practice is the goal of the Integration stage. After all the tactics have been implemented, their efficacy and results are evaluated. A more streamlined and evidence-based method of enhancing patient care and results can be guaranteed if healthcare providers adhere to this strategy. In a study (Ruzafa-Martnez et al., 2020),.

Scope of the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)

The scope of this EBP project will be defined using the PICOT framework:

1. Population: The population of interest includes all patients admitted to the medical-surgical unit.
2. Intervention: The intervention for this project is implementing a fall prevention program.
3. Comparison: The comparison for this project is the current standard of care for fall prevention in the medical-surgical unit.

• Outcome: The outcome of interest is reducing the number of falls and fall-related injuries in the medical-surgical unit.

1. Time: The project will be implemented over six months.
2. Identification of Stakeholders: Stakeholders from various fields must work together to implement EBP successfully. Interprofessional team members like nurses, doctors, PTs, OTs, and PCTs have been identified as stakeholders in this project (Miranda-Duro et al., 2021).
3. Identification of Stakeholders and Responsibilities

For its success, it is essential to involve many people in the implementation process. There will be at least one interprofessional stakeholder in this project, in addition to the unit managers and relevant departments within the practice area. Active engagement, collaboration, resource allocation, and project progress evaluation are just a few of the duties assigned to team members and interprofessional team members (Zhou et al., 2022). As an added task, team members will scour the literature for examples of effective fall prevention programs. As part of the interdisciplinary team, they will also be expected to analyze the data and report their findings thoroughly.

Evidence

Conducting Internal and External Searches of Evidence:

Internal and external searches of evidence are critical for information gathering in the first phase of the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation. Extensive internal and external searches are performed in this procedure. Clinical databases, organizational policies, and quality improvement data are all examples of internal sources that might shed light on healthcare practices and outcomes in a given setting. On the other hand, external sources include research papers, manuals, and recommendations from outside the company. These supplementary readings help gain a holistic understanding of evidence-based methods and suggestions. Healthcare practitioners can lay a solid groundwork for the rest of the knowledge transformation process by integrating data from both internal and external sources (Dewi et al., 2020).

Integration and Summary of Evidence:

The evidence collected in the first stage of the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation will be integrated and summarized in the second. Gather the data from Milestone 1 and enter it into the Evidence Summary form. Integrating data ensures that findings from multiple sources are pooled and properly cataloged. After all the data has been combined, a summary emphasizes the most significant findings. This summary contains an analysis of the quality of the available evidence, a discussion of research gaps, and an estimate of how the proposed methods would affect patient outcomes. A better comprehension of the available evidence and its implications for clinical practice can be attained by healthcare workers through the use of clear summaries of the evidence (Worum et al., 2019).

Development of Recommendation for Change:

Creating a recommendation for action is the third step in the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation. The evidence has been analyzed and integrated to generate this suggestion. In line with the identified quality care or patient safety issue, it proposes options backed by evidence that could be used to fix the problem. The suggestion considers the results of previous steps, such as the evidence summary and the evaluation of the evidence’s strength. If healthcare providers take the time to develop a proposal based on reliable data, they may rest assured that the changes they offer will positively affect patient care and outcomes. The purpose of this phase is to outline specific steps that can be taken to enhance the quality and safety of patient care by adopting best practices based on the available evidence (Murphy et al., 2022).

Translation

Development of an Action Plan for Implementation:

In order to help everything go off without a hitch, To ensure the smooth execution of the strategy, a detailed action plan will be created. The steps you take, the materials you’ll need, and the schedule for implementing this plan will all be spelled out here. It will help everyone on the team know what they are responsible for and how they may best contribute to the project (Henkel et al., 2019). In addition, the implementation process will be continuously monitored and evaluated to ascertain whether or not the proposed solutions are having the anticipated effect on patient outcomes.

Inclusion of Measurable Outcomes for Evaluation:

Measurable outcomes are established in the fourth stage of the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation to assess the success of the interventions. These results have been hand-picked to correspond with the aims of better patient safety and healthcare quality. Results that can be quantified are used to evaluate the efficacy of interventions and confirm that the intended gains have been made. Reduced medication mistakes, lower infection rates, higher patient satisfaction, and greater adherence to evidence-based policies are all examples of measurable results. To objectively evaluate the performance of the implemented changes and to make data-driven decisions for additional improvements, healthcare practitioners must define these measurable outcomes. Here, the focus is on keeping tabs on how things will ensure the evidence-based adjustments improve patient care (Hedsköld et al., 2021).

Timeline for Implementation:

A reasonable implementation schedule will be developed after considering the magnitude of the Change, the resources at hand, and any obstacles that may arise. The schedule will guarantee a methodical approach to the implementation, allowing for regular progress checks and course corrections. Evidence-based recommendations must be translated into practice, which necessitates the creation of an all-encompassing action plan. Measurable results for evaluation, a schedule for implementation, and clearly defined roles and responsibilities to facilitate effective communication and teamwork should all be included in the plan. Several researchers (Hossein-Zadeh et al., 2019).

Conclusion

Improving patient outcomes requires using strategies supported by scientific evidence to address problems with care quality or patient safety. This paper has introduced the Star Model of Knowledge Transformation, defined the scope of the EBP project with the PICOT framework, identified the stakeholders and their roles, summarized the relevant evidence, made a change recommendation, and mapped out a strategy for putting it into practice in a clinical setting. Healthcare organizations can improve patient safety and provide better care if they adopt this strategy (Khasawneh et al., 2021).

References

Khalil, H., & Kynoch, K. (2021, February 15). Implementing sustainable complex interventions in health care services: the triple C model. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06115-x

Patelarou, E., Giakoumidakis, K., Trivli, A., Kleisiaris, C., & Patelarou, A. (2022, September 27). Translation and Validation of the Greek Version of the Evidence-Based Practice Competency Questionnaire for Registered Nurses (EBP-COQ Prof©). https://scite.ai/reports/10.3390/nursrep12040069

Ruzafa-Martínez, María et al. (2020, November 20). Changes in nurse job outcomes after four years of implementing a Best Practice Spotlight Organization ® program in the Spanish National Health Context. https://scite.ai/reports/10.1111/jonm.13206

Miranda-Duro, Carmen, del, María et al. (2021, January 15). Occupational Therapy and the Use of Technology on Older Adult Fall Prevention: A Scoping Review. https://scite.ai/reports/10.3390/ijerph18020702

Zhou, Xin-Yi, et al. (2022, December 19). Evaluating the effects of simulated interprofessional teaching on the development of clinical core competence in nursing students: a mixed methods study. BMC Nursing, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-01108-5

Dewi, F. S. T., Lestari, S. K., Niamilah, I., & Wulandari, H. (2020, April 30). Developing a system to utilize surveillance data for evidence-based public health interventions: Sleman HDSS’s experience. Journal of Community Empowerment for Health, 3(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.22146/jcoemph.47144

Worum, H., Lillekroken, D., Ahlsen, B., Roaldsen, K. S., & Bergland, A. (2019, October 21). Bridging the gap between research-based knowledge and clinical practice: a qualitative examination of patients and physiotherapists’ views on the Otago exercise Programme. https://scite.ai/reports/10.1186/s12877-019-1309-6

Murphy, C., Laine, C. D., Macaulay, M., & Fader, M. (2022, May 26). A qualitative study of continence service provision for people living with dementia at home in the UK: Still inadequate? https://scite.ai/reports/10.1371/journal.pone.0268900

Henkel, T. G., Marion, J. W., & Bourdeau, D. T. (2019, June 1). Project Manager Motivation: Job Motivators and Maintenance Factors. Journal of Diversity Management (Jdm), 14(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.19030/jdm.v14i1.10290

Hedsköld, M., Sachs, M. A., Rosander, T., Knorring, M. V., & Härenstam, K. P. (2021, January 8). Acting between guidelines and reality- an interview study exploring the strategies of first-line managers in patient safety work. https://scite.ai/reports/10.1186/s12913-020-06042-3

Hossein-Zadeh, T., Ghanbari, A., Paryad, E., Maghsoudi, S., & Alizadeh, M. P. (2019, January 4). Research Priorities in Evidence-Based Nursing Cares: A Delphi Technique. Journal of Health Sciences. https://doi.org/10.17532/jhsci.2018.270

Khasawneh, E. A., Arulappan, J., Natarajan, J., Raman, S., & Isac, C. (2021, January 1). Efficacy of Simulation Using NLN/Jeffries Nursing Education Simulation Framework on Satisfaction and Self-Confidence of Undergraduate Nursing Students in a Middle Eastern Country. https://scite.ai/reports/10.1177/23779608211011316