NSB 502 Introduction to Evidence-Based

Third year nursing unit NSB 502: Introduction to Evidence-based Practice: essay in the form of a submission

Developed by Dr Leigh Davis and Moira Cordiner

Synopsis of the task and its context

This unit is an introductory third year nursing unit at QUT. Leigh wanted to do a criteria sheet for a unit that had not been revised using CRA principles. She was aware of problems with the unit outline because it had too many objectives and many of them gave the impression of being specific tasks. New objectives were developed that still linked to the existing objectives. These new objectives informed the criteria for this task, thus the criteria were still aligned to the old objectives. The remainder of the unit will be revised in the future. This exercise demonstrates that you can develop criteria sheets that relate to objectives, even when these objectives are flawed and/or unmanageable in number. Students individually engage in the process of evidence-based practice in a real-life clinical situation, in which they determine the currency and level of evidence that is required to support nursing practice. They then develop a submission for practice change to the Director of the hospital in the scenario. The submission is in two parts: a structured essay of 2,000 words with headings and a completed draft policy (in a template).

Match between objectives/learning outcomes and criteria for the task

Objectives (unrevised) / Task-specific criteria
On completion of this unit you should be able to:
1. Describe the notion of evidence and evidence-based practice, development of the evidence-based practice movement and strengths and weaknesses of the evidence-based process / 1. Demonstrate and apply knowledge of the principles of evidence-based practice to the given scenario.
2. Explain the links between research, clinical expertise and evidence-based practice
3. Differentiate between literature reviews, systematic reviews and evidence-based clinical guidelines and discuss their role in the evidence-based process / 2. Analyse and evaluate heath information and research to justify selection of evidence, the draft policy and its acceptability.
4. Outline key elements in the evidence-based process and principles for appraising and implementing evidence in clinical practice
5. Demonstrate, in written form, the ability to critically apply evidence-based principles to selected client problem
6. Present written arguments that demonstrate a critical understanding of barriers and drivers to evidence utilization and strategies for facilitating the application of evidence to practice
6. Present written arguments that demonstrate a critical understanding of barriers and drivers to evidence utilization and strategies for facilitating the application of evidence to practice / 3. Communicate to the director of nursing through scholarly writing.

Interpreting the criteria sheet on the next page

Note that this criteria sheet uses some descriptors across standards. For example, all the descriptors for criterion 1 (which is about the demonstrating and applying knowledge) and criterion 3 (about communicating) apply to standards HD and DN because this is what Leigh typically sees in student work and what she expects of students who reach these two standards. In the second criterion (about analysing, evaluating and justifying), the descriptors for standard HD and DN are all different. This means that it is these descriptors that distinguish a standard HD from a DN.This way of setting out standards can help you avoid ‘contriving’ a difference between the standards when, in some instances, there is no difference.

NSB 502 Introduction to Evidence-based PracticeAssessment task: Submission for practice change- essay. Weighting 50%

STUDENT NAME / MARKER
Criteria / HD (High Distinction) / DN (Distinction) / CR (Credit) / PP (Pass) / NN (Fail)
Demonstrate and apply knowledge of the principles of evidence-based practice to the given scenario.
weighting 1/4
(10 marks) / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have:

explained why a hospital policy is needed by providing valid reasons that directly relate to practice and patient outcomes

explained why a hospital policy is needed by providing valid reasons that relate to some practice and patient outcomes

explained why a hospital policy is needed by providing reasons that are linked loosely to practice and patient outcomes

stated that a hospital policy is needed by restating parts of the scenario

used the PICO format to devise a plausible clinical question that directly relates to the key issues

used the PICO format to devise a clinical question that mostly relates to the key issues

used the PICO format to devise a clinical question that relates to some of the key issues

devised a question

Analyse and evaluate heath information and research to justify selection of evidence, the draft policy and its acceptability.
weighting 1/2
(30 marks) / comprehensively analysed and evaluated the selected sources to: / analysed and evaluated the selected sources to: / analysed and evaluated the selected sources to: / analysed and evaluated the selected sources to:

correctly identify the quality of evidence, and discuss and synthesise best practice in relation to the clinical problem

correctly identify the quality of evidence, and discuss mostly best practice in relation to the clinical problem

identify the quality of evidence and discuss practice outlined in the sources

paraphrased evidence from the selected sources

complete the draft policy consistent with the policy statement and objective by:

complete the draft policy consistent with the policy statement and objective by:

complete the draft policy consistent with the policy statement and objective by:

complete the draft policy by that is mostly consistent with the policy statement and objective by:

partially completed the draft policy by:

suggesting a realistic outcome standard and a range of valid evaluation methods / suggesting a realistic outcome standard and valid evaluation methods / suggesting a realistic outcome standard and evaluation methods / suggesting an outcome standard and evaluation methods / suggesting an outcome standard and/or evaluation method
devisinga detailed and logical sequence of procedural steps that reflect best practice / devisinga logical sequence of procedural steps that reflect best practice / devisinga logicalsequence of procedural steps that mostly reflect best practice / devising a sequence of procedural steps that reflect some aspects of best practice / listing some procedural steps

convincingly justify and support why the draft policy should be accepted by consideringthe impact of the evidence-based process on nursing care and patient outcomes

justify and support why the draft policy should be accepted by considering the impact of the evidence-based process on nursing care and patient outcomes

justify and support why the draft policy should be accepted by describing links between the evidence, nursing care and patient outcomes

justify and support why the draft policy should be accepted by referring to the evidence in the sources

stated that the draft policy should be accepted

Communicate to the director of nursing through scholarly writing.
weighting 1/4
(10 marks) / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have: / In your submission for practice change, you have:

clearly and concisely communicated in scholarly writing, in both the structured essay and the resulting draft policy

communicated in scholarly writing that is mostly clearand concise, in both the structured essay and the resulting draft policy

communicated in scholarly writing that is mostly clear, in both the structured essay and the resulting draft policy

used everyday rather than scholarly writingin both the structured essay and the resulting draft policy

correctly cited all sources by consistently adhering to a referencing convention, in both the text, the reference list and the policy procedural steps

correctly cited most sources by adhering to a referencing convention in both the text, the reference list and the policy procedural steps

cited most sources using a referencing convention, in both the text, the reference list and the policy procedural steps, with occasional errors

partially acknowledged some sources

Comments
Overall grade
Marks /50