PICOT Question Paper

PICOT Question Paper

PICOT Question Paper

 Among elderly American individuals who are aged 65 and above (P) in nursing homes, does the introduction of a multidisciplinary health education workshop (I) compared to standard care (C) lead to an increase in the adequate control of blood pressure, increased adherence to medication and an overall reduction in hypertension-related complications (O) over four months (T)?

PICOT Problem

The PICOT problem centers on examining the impact of introducing a multidisciplinary health education workshop, in comparison to standard care, among elderly American individuals aged 65 and above residing in nursing homes. The desired outcomes encompass achieving adequate blood pressure control, enhancing medication adherence, and reducing hypertension-related complications within four months.

In clinical care, this PICOT question addresses the pressing concern of suboptimal hypertension management among elderly nursing home residents. Clinical issues such as uncontrolled blood pressure, poor medication compliance, and heightened risk of hypertension-related complications loom large (Guasti et al., 2022). For this vulnerable population, these challenges lead to higher morbidity and a lower quality of life (Burnier & Aikaterini, 2023). A multidisciplinary health education workshop is a promising example of an evidence-based strategy. This intervention intends to deliver targeted education and assistance to empower older individuals to effectively manage their blood pressure by utilizing the pooled experience of diverse healthcare professionals. In organizing and conducting these seminars, nursing interventions would ensure that residents receive essential knowledge and guidance.

The PICOT problem resonates throughout the patient care continuum. It envisages improved health outcomes, increased patient engagement, and heightened awareness of hypertension-related risks. The intervention aligns seamlessly with person-centered care, where patients’ preferences and needs are respected and integrated into the healthcare plan. From a healthcare organization perspective, this PICOT problem prompts a re-evaluation of existing protocols and interventions. It underscores the potential benefits of adopting a collaborative and educational approach to hypertension management.

Furthermore, it reinforces the notion that prevention and education are potent tools in reducing healthcare expenditures associated with complications arising from uncontrolled blood pressure. Within the realm of nursing practice, this PICOT question accentuates the significance of continuous learning and interdisciplinary collaboration. Nurses are pivotal in executing the proposed intervention, reinforcing their crucial contribution to patient education and health promotion (Adeyeye et al., 2022).

The Intervention

One nursing intervention that can address the identified PICOT problem is implementing a structured multidisciplinary health education workshop focused on hypertension management for elderly residents aged 65 and above in nursing homes. This intervention involves a collaborative effort among nurses, physicians, dietitians, and pharmacists to educate patients about hypertension, its complications, the importance of medication adherence, and lifestyle modifications. The workshops would include discussion-based sessions, individualized care plans, pharmaceutical counseling, food advice, and advice on physical activity. Nurses would be essential in planning, leading, and assessing these workshops to ensure patients receive thorough education and assistance.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Summary of Clinical Problem and Patient Outcome

The current clinical issue is the inadequate management of hypertension among seniors in nursing homes who are 65 years of age and older. Inadequate blood pressure management, noncompliance with recommended treatment regimens, and an increased risk of complications from hypertension, such as kidney damage, heart attack, and stroke, are some of the harmful health outcomes that may emerge from this issue. However, by addressing this clinical issue through the implementation of a multidisciplinary health education workshop, a favorable patient outcome is feasible. The intended program would provide senior citizens with the knowledge, inspiration, and help they need to regulate their blood pressure successfully. This training would involve understanding the importance of taking prescribed drugs exactly as prescribed, adopting healthy lifestyle adjustments, and spotting potential complications. Patients will likely benefit from this intervention in terms of improved blood pressure control, improved adherence to treatment regimens, and reduced hypertension complications. Finally, a positive patient outcome includes enhanced quality of life, less morbidity, and greater autonomy and participation in their healthcare, addressing the clinical problem and improving overall well-being for this vulnerable population (Delavar et al., 2020).

Imagine a patient population in a separate nursing home that does not get an organized health education program to compare the impact of the intervention. Throughout four months, the nursing home implementing the intervention might expect a rise in medication compliance, improved blood pressure management, and fewer hypertension-related issues among its residents. However, without the intervention, the scenario in the nursing home can stay the same, with uncontrolled blood pressure, inconsistent medication use, and a greater likelihood of complications. The nursing home with the intervention may eventually show a statistically significant improvement in health outcomes compared to the nursing home without the intervention.

The nursing intervention would require careful planning and implementation. The transformation process would require several steps, including finishing a preliminary needs assessment, preparing training materials and sessions, instructing the healthcare team on their responsibilities, and delivering the workshops to residents. Nurses would need to make sure that the workshops are customized to the needs and preferences of the elderly population, taking into account their physical and cognitive limitations (Zafar et al., 2021). Ongoing monitoring and evaluation would be necessary to determine if the intervention was beneficial and to make any necessary adjustments.

References

Adeyeye, E., Kapil, V., & Lobo, M. D. (2022). Hypertension. Medicine, 50(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2022.04.002

Burnier, M., & Aikaterini Damianaki. (2023). Hypertension as Cardiovascular Risk Factor in Chronic Kidney Disease. 132(8), 1050–1063. https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.122.321762

Delavar, F., Pashaeypoor, S., & Negarandeh, R. (2020). The effects of self-management education tailored to health literacy on medication adherence and blood pressure control among elderly people with primary hypertension: A randomized controlled trial. Patient Education and Counseling, 103(2), 336–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.08.028

Guasti, L., Ambrosetti, M., Ferrari, M., Marino, F., Ferrini, M., Sudano, I., Tanda, M. L., Parrini, I., Asteggiano, R., & Cosentino, M. (2022). Management of hypertension in the elderly and frail patient. Drugs & Aging, 39(10), 763–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-022-00966-7

Zafar, H., Hall, P., Sengupta, R., Dineen, B., Houlihan, A., Sharif, R., Gibson, I., & Sharif, F. (2021). Patient empowerment through community-based hypertension educational programme in the West of Ireland. SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine, 3(5), 1096–1105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-021-00846-y

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Review your problem or issue and the study materials to formulate a PICOT (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Time) question for your capstone project change proposal. A PICOT question starts with a designated patient population in a particular clinical area and identifies clinical problems or issues that arise from clinical care. The intervention used to address the problem must be a nursing practice intervention. Include a comparison of the nursing intervention to a patient population not currently receiving the nursing intervention, and specify the timeframe needed to implement the change process. Formulate a PICOT question using the PICOT format (provided in the assigned readings) that addresses the clinical nursing problem.
The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project change proposal.
In a paper of 500-750 words, clearly identify the clinical problem and how it can result in a positive patient outcome.
Step 1: Create PICOT question; A PICOT question is presented and provides a clear framework for the capstone project change proposal. Your PICOT question should clearly outline all of these elements: patient, intervention, comparison, outcome and time.
Step 2: PICOT Problem: Identify the PICOT problem, what clinical problems or issues may arise from clinical care? The PICOT problem as it relates to evidence-based solution, nursing intervention, patient care, health care agency, and nursing practice is thoroughly described.
Step 3: Describe nursing intervention: A nursing intervention used to address the problem. Compare the nursing intervention to a patient population not currently receiving the nursing intervention, and timeframe needed to implement the change process.
Step 4: Summarize Clinical Problem and Patient Outcome: The clinical problem and how it can result in a positive patient outcome.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

NOTE
This is the prof responses to my PICOT question. Please let us factor it in the writing.
Good start to your PICOT, however, your intervention, leave it at multidisciplinary health education workshop. You can explain the rest of it in your writing when you talk about the intervention

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Project Topic for Focus of Change Proposal

2 points

Criteria Description

Project Topic for Focus of Change Proposal

5. Target

2 points

The problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project that will be the focus of the change proposal is clearly and logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

1.78 points

The problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project that will be the focus of the change proposal is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

1.58 points

The problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project that will be the focus of the change proposal is summarized. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

1.5 points

The problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project that will be the focus of the change proposal is presented but is largely incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project that will be the focus of the change proposal is omitted.

Setting or Context Where Project Topic Is Observed

4 points

Criteria Description

Setting or Context Where Project Topic Is Observed

5. Target

4 points

The setting or context in which the problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project can be observed is logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

3.56 points

The setting or context in which the problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project can be observed is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

3.16 points

The setting or context in which the problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project can be observed is summarized. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

3 points

The setting or context in which the problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project can be observed is presented but is largely incomplete.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The setting or context in which the problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project can be observed is omitted.

Detailed Description of Project Topic

6 points

Criteria Description

Detailed Description of Project Topic

5. Target

6 points

A detailed description of the project topic is clearly and logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

5.34 points

A description of the project topic is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

4.74 points

A description of the project topic is presented. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

4.5 points

A description of the project topic is presented but is largely incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the project topic is omitted.

Effect of Identified Problem or Issue

6 points

Criteria Description

Effect of Identified Problem or Issue

5. Target

6 points

Effect of the identified problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project is clearly and logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

5.34 points

Effect of the identified problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project is presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

4.74 points

Effect of the identified problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project is summarized. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

4.5 points

Effect of the identified problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project is presented but is largely incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Effect of the identified problem or issue, intervention, quality initiative, educational need, or collaborative interprofessional team project is omitted.

Topic Significance and Implications for Nursing Practice

4 points

Criteria Description

Topic Significance and Implications for Nursing Practice

5. Target

4 points

Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

3.56 points

Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

3.16 points

Topic and most criteria are presented. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

3 points

Topic is presented but criteria are incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Significance of topic and its implications for nursing practice is omitted.

Proposed Solution for Identified Project Topic and Implications for Nursing Practice

4 points

Criteria Description

Proposed Solution for Identified Project Topic and Implications for Nursing Practice

5. Target

4 points

Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Support and rationale are evident.

4. Acceptable

3.56 points

Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.

3. Approaching

3.16 points

Topic and most criteria are presented. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Some support is needed.

2. Insufficient

3 points

Topic is presented but criteria are incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A proposed solution to the identified project topic with an explanation of how it will affect nursing practice is omitted.

Peer-Reviewed Articles

2 points

Criteria Description

Peer-Reviewed Articles

5. Target

2 points

Eight peer-reviewed articles are presented, and each article clearly meets the assignment criteria.

4. Acceptable

1.78 points

Eight peer-reviewed articles are presented. Overall, only seven articles meet the assignment criteria.

3. Approaching

1.58 points

Eight peer-reviewed articles are presented. Overall, only six articles meet the assignment criteria.

2. Insufficient

1.5 points

Fewer than seven peer-reviewed articles are presented. Overall, only five articles meet the assignment criteria.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fewer than six peer-reviewed articles are presented.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

2.8 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target

2.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable

2.49 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching

2.21 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

2. Insufficient

2.1 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

2.8 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

5. Target

2.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable

2.49 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching

2.21 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient

2.1 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Evidence

2.4 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

5. Target

2.4 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are clearly considered.

4. Acceptable

2.14 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching

1.9 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient

1.8 points

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is superficial or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

Mechanics of Writing

2.4 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target

2.4 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable

2.14 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching

1.9 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient

1.8 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Format/Documentation

1.6 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target

1.6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable

1.42 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching

1.26 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient

1.2 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.