Assignent Solutionnurs

Overall Evaluator Comments
EVALUATOR COMMENTS
To support you in demonstrating proficiency, you’ll be unable to resubmit your task until you’ve consulted with a Course Instructor. Your essay effectively shows how hospital-acquired infections are a healthcare concern by describing the development of lifelong complications in health as potential impacts to the patients and increased morbidity and mortality rates as potential impacts to the organization. Feedback is provided in the score report below with information about the aspects that need revisions.
A. Clinical Practice Problem
Competent: The submission includes a discussion of the clinical practice problem that logically addresses its impact on the patient(s) and the organization it affects.
There are no comments for this aspect.
A1. PICO Components
Not Evident: The submission does not include each of the given PICO components of the clinical practice problem. EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1 An EBP question is thoughtfully presented in the work related to reducing hospital-acquired infections. This aspect is incomplete because the PICO breakdown is missing from the work.
A2. Evidence-Based Question
Approaching Competence: The submission includes an EBP question, but the EBP question does not appropriately address the clinical practice problem or does not include all the PICO components. EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
A promising EBP question related to reducing hospital-acquired infections is provided. This aspect is incomplete, as the EBP question does not contain an appropriate Intervention and comparison.
B. Selection of a Research-Based Article
Approaching Competence: The selected article is not research based or does not answer the EBP question from part A2.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
An article by Sickbert- Bennett et al.,(2016) discussing the reduction of HAIs by using hand hygiene compliance is clearly noted. Unfortunately, this article is unacceptable because it is a non-research article. Please select an appropriate research article exploring the identified problem and that supports the suggested intervention so that Aspects B-B7 can be fully evaluated.
B1. Background/Introduction of the Research-Based Article
Not Evident: The submission does not include a discussion of the background or introduction.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B2. Research Methodology
Not Evident: The submission does not include a description of the research methodology.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B3. Level of Evidence in the Research-Based Article
Not Evident: The submission does not identify a level of evidence for the research-based article.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B4. Analysis of the Data
Not Evident: The submission does not include a summary of data analysis.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B5. Ethical Considerations
Not Evident: The submission does not include a summary of ethical considerations. Or, the submission does not include an explanation of why no ethical considerations are present if the research-based article contains none.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B6. Quality Rating of the Research-Based Article
Not Evident: The submission does not identify a quality rating of the research-based article.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
B7. Results/Conclusions of the Research-Based Article
Not Evident: The submission does not include an analysis of the results or conclusions of the research-based article.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
C. Selection of a Non-Research-Based Article
Approaching Competence: The selected article is not a non-research article or does not answer the EBP question from part A2.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
The submission utilizes an article (Hiller,2020) that cannot be located in the WGU library, so it cannot be accessed to review. Please submit the full text of the article so that it can be reviewed.
C1. Background/Introduction of the Non-Research Article
Not Evident: The submission does not include a discussion of the background or introduction.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
C2. Type of Evidence
Not Evident: The submission does not include a description of a type of evidence.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
C3. Level of Evidence in the Non-Research Article
Not Evident: The submission does not identify a level of evidence for the non-research-based article.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
C4. Quality Rating of the Non-Research Article
Not Evident: The submission does not identify a quality rating for the non-research-based article.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
C5. Author’s Recommendation
Not Evident: The submission does not include a discussion of the author’s recommendation(s) that helped answer the EBP question.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
N/A
D. Recommended Practice Change
Approaching Competence: The submission includes a practice change recommendation, but the recommendation does not appropriately address the EBP question. Or, the recommendation does not accurately utilize both the research and non-research articles to show how the change should be made.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
A reasonable recommended practice change of using handwashing with soap and water to reduce nosocomial infections is evident. This aspect is incomplete, as a discussion that accurately utilizes both the research and non-research articles to show how the change should be made is not evident.
D1. Involvement of Key Stakeholders
Approaching Competence: The submission includes an explanation of 3 key stake holders’ involvement, but the explanation does not describe how 1 or more of the stakeholders would appropriately support the practice change recommendation.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
Nurses and patients at the care facility are adeptly identified as key stakeholders. This aspect is not complete, as the identification of a third stakeholder and an explanation of how the three key stakeholders would support the practice change recommendation is not provided.
D2. Barrier of Implementing the Practice Change
Competent
D3. Strategy for Overcoming the Barrier
Competent
D4. Outcome to Measure the Recommend Practice Change
Competent
E. APA Sources
Competent
F. Professional Communication
Not Evident: Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.
EVALUATOR COMMENTS: ATTEMPT 1
The submission requires significant revisions to more than 75% of the task. The area will be evaluated on resubmission.