Running head: PROCESS EVALUATION
1
Process Evaluation
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
PROCESS EVALUATION
2
Process Evaluation
The healthcare topic being discussed is pressure ulcers. The intervention method selected
is an evidence-based practice for mitigating pressure sores among patients receiving care services
in the hospital. Pressure sores cause significant discomfort and pain to the patient, which can
adversely affect their recovery time. Through evidence-based practice, the nurses and clinicians
can develop better ways of reducing the risks of patients getting pressure ulcers. For instance, the
healthcare workers may identify accessories such as silicone foam dressing, which can be used to
ensure the patient’s comfort at all times (Truong et al., 2016). By gathering the evidence that the
accessories are working, the hospital can then implement the solution.
The intervention and resources developed will be measured through a process evaluation
technique. This evaluation technique assesses the success of the project based on the strategy laid
down in the model. This approach will measure the prevalence rate of pressure sources in the
hospital and compare the numbers with previous statistics. Additionally, the attitudes of healthcare
workers towards the issue will be assessed. The process evaluation technique will also analyze the
goals of the intervention against the process implemented. In three months, data will be collected
on new patient hospitalization and whether the patients are getting pressure sores. A decline in the
number of patients with pressure sores will indicate the intervention process is working as planned.
Additionally, a positive change in the nurses’ attitudes towards checking patients for pressure sores
and ensuring their comfort will indicate consistent growth.
PROCESS EVALUATION
3
References
Truong, B., Grigson, E., Patel, M., & Liu, X. (2016). Pressure ulcer prevention in the hospital
setting using silicone foam dressings. Cureus, 8(8).
Course Code
NRS-493
Class Code
NRS-493-O500
Criteria
Content
Percentage
80.0%
Revisions Incorporated as Directed by Instructor 5.0%
Background
5.0%
Clinical Problem Statement
5.0%
Purpose of Change Proposal
5.0%
PICOT Question
5.0%
Literature Search
5.0%
Evaluation of Literature
5.0%
Change or Nursing Theory
5.0%
Implementation Plan and Outcome Measures
10.0%
Use of Evidence-Based Practice in Intervention
Plan
10.0%
Plan for Evaluating Proposed Nursing
Intervention
10.0%
Potential Barriers and Plan to Overcome Barriers 10.0%
Organization and Effectiveness
15.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
5.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
5.0%
Criteria 3Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Format
5.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
2.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
3.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Benchmark - Capstone Project Change Proposal
1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
Revision is omitted.
Background of clinical problem omitted.
Clinical problem statement omitted.
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing
patient care in the changing health care system is omitted.
PICOT questions is omitted.
Literature search strategy employed omitted.
Evaluation of literature omitted.
Change or nursing theory omitted.
Implementation plan and outcome measures are omitted.
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan omitted.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention omitted.
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are omitted.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
200.0
2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%)
Revision is incomplete. Many aspects are still incomplete,
inaccurate, or unclear.
Background of clinical problem is incomplete.
Clinical problem statement is incomplete.
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing
patient care in the changing health care system is incomplete.
Topic is presented but criteria is incomplete.
Topic is presented but criteria is incomplete.
Evaluation of literature is incomplete.
Change or nursing theory is incomplete.
Implementation plan and outcome measures are presented is
incomplete.
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is
incomplete.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is
incomplete.
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are
incomplete.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence
structure, or word choice are present.
Template is used, but some elements are missing or
mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
3: Satisfactory (79.00%)
Most key aspects were revised. Some aspects are still vague
or contain minor inaccuracies.
Background of clinical problem are summarized. There are
minor omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or
information is needed.
Clinical problem statement is summarized. There are minor
omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is
needed.
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing
patient care in the changing health care system is
summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.
Some support or information is needed.
Topic and most criteria are presented. There are minor
omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is
needed.
Topic and most criteria are presented. There are minor
omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is
needed.
Evaluation of literature is summarized. There are minor
omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is
needed.
Change or nursing theory is summarized. There are minor
omissions or inaccuracies. Some support or information is
needed.
Implementation plan and outcome measures are
summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.
Some support or information is needed.
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is
summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.
Some support or information is needed.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is
summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.
Some support or information is needed.
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are
summarized. There are minor omissions or inaccuracies.
Some support or information is needed.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The
argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument
logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources
used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the
thesis.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are
not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence
structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some
minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
4: Good (89.00%)
The key aspects were revised. The revision generally
improves the accuracy and clarity of the project.
Background of clinical problem are presented. Minor aspects
are unclear or require support.
Clinical problem statement is presented. Minor aspects are
unclear or require support.
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing
patient care in the changing health care system is presented.
Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or
require support.
Topic and criteria are presented. Minor aspects are unclear or
require support.
Evaluation of literature is presented. Minor aspects are
unclear or require support.
Change or nursing theory is presented. Minor aspects are
unclear or require support.
Implementation plan and outcome measures are presented.
Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is
presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is
presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are
presented. Minor aspects are unclear or require support.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may
be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective
figures of speech are used.
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in
formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
5: Excellent (100.00%)
Comments
All revisions are incorporated. The revision greatly improves
the accuracy and clarity of the project.
The Capstone template that I posted in the
announcement area was not followed in
it's entirety. Several key component was
not addressed thoroughly or were
omitted.
Background of clinical problem are clearly and logically
presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
Clinical problem statement is clearly and logically presented.
Relevant support and rationale are evident.
Purpose of the change proposal in relation to providing
patient care in the changing health care system is logically
presented. Relevant support and rationale are evident.
Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Relevant Placing the topic week 3 assignment here
support and rationale are evident.
would earn excellent.
Topic and criteria are clearly and logically presented. Relevant
support and rationale are evident.
Evaluation of literature is clearly and logically presented.
Relevant support and rationale are evident.
The topic week six assignment goes here
for excellent.
Change or nursing theory is logically presented. Relevant
support and rationale are evident.
Implementation plan and outcome measures are clearly and
logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are
evident.
Citation of sources needed for support.
Use of evidence-based practice in intervention plan is clearly
and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are
evident.
The intervention plan was not addressed.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing intervention is clearly
and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are
evident.
Plan for evaluating proposed nursing
intervention was omitted.
Potential barriers and plan to overcome barriers are clearly
and logically presented. Relevant support and rationale are
evident.
Citation of sources needed for support.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
The capstone template that I posted in the
announcement area was not utilized in it's
entirety. Several key components of the
assignment were omitted. The literature
table was not included as advised.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Students were to use a minimum of 8 peerreviewed research articles to develop the
body of the assignment.
Points Earned
7.90/10.00
10.00/10.00
10.00/10.00
10.00/10.00
8.90/10.00
0.00/10.00
7.90/10.00
10.00/10.00
17.80/20.00
0.00/20.00
0.00/20.00
17.80/20.00
8.90/10.00
8.90/10.00
10.00/10.00
3.16/4.00
4.50/6.00
135.76/200.0
Purchase answer to see full
attachment