Northern Kentucky University Overview VT of Matrix Nursing Essay

User Generated

puvalrer05

Health Medical

Northern Kentucky University

Description

Overview VT of Matrix Assignment: 

This  assignment will require you to take the PICO, 5 research articles and place them in a table for analysis.  You will critique each article and identify the most important parts of the research, analysis, and findings.

Then  you will summarize the articles by grading the research, and identifying gaps in the literature as well as possible interventions (see grading rubric and examples).

This will serve as the foundation for the work you will do in the Project/Practicum courses. As you work with your preceptor and finalize your capstone project, you will continue to build on this material.  This assignment will be graded within 3-4 days of due date, with feedback provided once all grading has been completed. 

This assignment enables the learners to meet Course SLO #1, 2, 3, 4  

Instructions:

Identify your PICO or research question of interest

Gather 5 research articles on your topic: be sure to save them and submit them along with the matrix;  please make sure they are PDF documents. Do not use clinical guidelines or Cochran Reviews, abstracts, or  poster presentations.  You can search for research only by indicating "research" when you do an advanced search.  If you can't answer a lot of the questions, it is probably not a research article. 

Review sample matrices and summaries

Use matrix table- one for each article and critique the parts of the article using the rubric

Be sure to identify the evaluation tool used to grade the evidence such as (See below for grading the evidence tools)

Identify where there are issues with the articles and what gaps were not addressed with the research; be prepared this may change the way you look at your topic or may result in a slightly different direction for your area of interest. This is ok- that is what you want to accomplish with this assignment. It will really assist you as you move forward with your project.

For this assignment you will turn in the matrix tables, summary, references and pdf copies of your 5 articles. 

Key definitions:

Level of evidence:  the process used to evaluate the level of evidence of your articles- such as Jones Hopkins,  Cincinnati Children's evaluation etc,

Evaluation tool: use the method and describe how you arrived at the scoring or knowing that the article included all content it needed to- such as CASP; 

Instrument: What type of instrument or tool was used in the article?  This could be  a depression screening tool, Nurse satisfaction tool etc.  Describe the instrument- how many questions, reliability- consistency with test-retest, Cronbach Alpha, inter-rater reliablity; validity with content validity, face validity 

Files: 

Use this form for your assignment: Article Matrix and Analysis Revised 10.2020-1.docx

Rubric: DNP 816 Rubric for Matrix and Summary 10.2020 Final v2.docx

Sample 1 Matrix_dnp816. Fall 2020 with permission.docx

Sample 2 DNP 816 Matrix Fall 2020 with permission.docx

Links to critical appraisal tools to evaluate research quality:

Joanna Briggs Institute (joannabriggs.org) Joanna Briggs Institute (Links to an external site.)  (Links to an external site.)

CASP checklists (Links to an external site.)

Mixed Method appraisal checklist McGill:  (Links to an external site.)

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center Legend tools- very helpful (Links to an external site.)

Johns Hopkins EBP Models and Tools  (Links to an external site.)


Unformatted Attachment Preview

DNP 618 Article Matrix and Analysis Student Name __________________________________ PICO Question ___________________________________________________________________ Search process : Search terms: Data bases: Total number of articles obtained from search results: N= Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N= Number of articles reviewed: N= Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N= Inclusion Criteria: Exclusion Criteria: Number of systematic reviews or meta analyses used in Matrix- N = Repeat this table – one for each article you are review. DO NOT double space in the table The matrix and analysis assignment to submit consists of : 1). introduction describing the search process for this topic, 2). the review table (1 for each article = 5), 3). summary analysis, 4). reference page and 5). PDF copies of the articles – list by 1st author name as attachments Fall 10.2020 Author, year; Credentials Article #1 Article Focus/Title Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence Evaluation Tool (CASP or othersidentify tool used) Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure Instruments and Reliability/validity of instruments Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings Results Discussion/ Significance of findings Reliability and Validity of study, limitations Helpful/Reliable Compared to other articles Fall 10.2020 If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment Author, year; Credentials Article #1 Article Focus/Title Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence Evaluation Tool (CASP or othersidentify tool used) Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure Instruments and Reliability/validity of instruments Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings Results Discussion/ Significance of findings Reliability and Validity of study, limitations Helpful/Reliable Compared to other articles Fall 10.2020 If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment Author, year; Credentials Article #1 Article Focus/Title Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence Evaluation Tool (CASP or othersidentify tool used) Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure Instruments and Reliability/validity of instruments Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings Results Discussion/ Significance of findings Reliability and Validity of study, limitations Helpful/Reliable Compared to other articles Fall 10.2020 If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment Author, year; Credentials Article #1 Article Focus/Title Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence Evaluation Tool (CASP or othersidentify tool used) Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure Instruments and Reliability/validity of instruments Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings Results Discussion/ Significance of findings Reliability and Validity of study, limitations Helpful/Reliable Compared to other articles Fall 10.2020 If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment Author, year; Credentials Article #1 Article Focus/Title Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence Evaluation Tool (CASP or othersidentify tool used) Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure Instruments and Reliability/validity of instruments Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings Results Discussion/ Significance of findings Reliability and Validity of study, limitations Helpful/Reliable Compared to other articles Fall 10.2020 If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment Summary section: Summary and synthesis of all 5 research articles; include level of evidence of all 5 articles, summary and comparison of outcomes of articles, include statements about the quality of the articles, instruments, what research still needs to be done on your topic, identifies gaps in care, addresses health promotion pertinent for area, analyzes interventions for populations. Did the article change your thinking about your research topic? Reference Page – List articles used in the matrix as well as any other references you might have used in the summary. Start this on a new page. Fall 10.2020 DNP 816 Matrix and Summary Rubric Element 7.5 points 5 points 3.5 points 2 points Source information and quality (7.5 points) All key elements are present: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, and publication is peer reviewed/ scholarly, article is based on research and relates to the chosen topic of concern; is a primary source Two key elements are present: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, ad publication is peer reviewed/ scholarly, article is based on research and relates to the chosen topic of concern but is a secondary source One key element is listed: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, ad publication is peer reviewed/ scholarly, the articles only partially relate to the chosen topic of concern or is a secondary source Missing key elements: Author credentials listed, article is more than 5 years old, and publication is peer reviewed/ scholarly, the article has little or nothing to do with the topic of concern and is a secondary source. The article is not research. Research Design and interventions described (.7.5 points) All key elements are present: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, See Polit/Beck pp. 18, 210), (pp. justification for not using a different 17, 201 in 11th research design, ed.) longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV if appropriate Elements are covered but not in enough depth: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, justification for not using a different research design, longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV Missing elements in this category- research design or intervention: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, justification for not using a different research design, longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV Missing key elements: does not identify the correct research design, no description of the intervention (if present), does not identify IV or DV (if appropriate) Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence and Evaluation tool used (CASP or others) (7.5 points) Key elements are not well described but are present: Strength of evidence, model used to grade the evidence and evaluation tool used. Missing elements in this category: Includes some information but it missing content related to grading the evidence, model use or evaluation tool. Does not include the level of evidence and model used to grade it. Does not use an evaluation tool to assess design Key elements addressed: What was the strength of the evidence in support of your research topicwhat model was used to grade the evidence? What evaluation tool was used to assess the See Polit/Beck p. evidence? 35 (p. 36-37 in 11th ed) 10.2020 DNP 816 Matrix and Summary Rubric Sample/# of participants, how recruited, power analysis? Data Collection procedure (7.5 points) Key elements are not well described but are present: was population identified, were sample procedures described? What type sampling plan as used? How were people recruited? Was there a power analysis? Was sample size large enough? Missing or superficial information: was population identified, were sample procedures described? What type sampling plan as used? How were people recruited? Was there a power analysis? Was sample size large enough? Does not include a discussion of the participants, how they were recruited, power analysis information, sample size adequacy. Limited information included. Instruments and Key Elements Reliability/validity addressed: includes a complete and thorough of instruments discussion of the (7.5 points) instruments used, types of questions, reliabilitySee p. 325 in (Cronbach alpha) and Polit/Beck (p. th validity, LOM 336 in 11 Ed). Key elements are not well described but are present: includes some discussion of the instruments used, types of questions, reliability(Cronbach alpha) and validity, LOM Key elements are missing or are very superficial: includes a complete discussion of the instruments used, types of questions, reliability (Cronbach alpha) and validity, LOM Does not include information concerning reliability or validity of instruments. Data Analysisidentify statistics, LOM, findings, Results (7.5 points) Key elements are not well described but are present: Was level of measurement identified? Were inferential stats used? Were tests parametric or nonparametric- why used? Were there significant results? Was there an appropriate amount of statistics info reported? Were all important results discussed? Key elements are missing or very superficial discussion: Was level of measurement identified? Were inferential stats used? Were tests parametric or nonparametric- why used? Were there significant results? Was there an appropriate amount of statistics info reported? Were all important results discussed? Missing information from discussion of data analysis: does not identify statistics used, no LOM, findings or results Key elements are not well described but are present: interpretation, limitations, implications for clinical practice, clinical significance, generalizability Key elements superficial : interpretation, limitations, implications for clinical practice, clinical significance, generalizability Missing information regarding: interpretation, limitations, implications for clinical practice, clinical significance, generalizability See p. 263 in Polit/Beck (p. 274 in 11th Ed) See pp. 371, 399 in Polit /Beck (pp. 381, 408 in 11th Ed) Discussion/ Key elements addressed: was population identified, were sample procedures described? What type sampling plan as used? How were people recruited? Was there a power analysis? Was sample size large enough? All elements thoroughly addressed. Key elements addressed thoroughly: Was level of measurement identified? Were inferential stats used? Were tests parametric or nonparametric- why used? Were there significant results? Was there an appropriate amount of statistics info reported? Were all important results discussed? Key elements addressed thoroughly: Significance of Was interpretation findings, appropriate? Were limitations identified? Reliability and Validity of study, Addressed study implications for clinical limitations (7.5 practice, did they make points) specific recommendations or miss important implications? Did 10.2020 DNP 816 Matrix and Summary Rubric See p. 457 in Polit/Beck (p. 465 in 11th ed) research address clinical significance? Did they address generalizability? Analysis, Helpful/Reliable Key elements answered thoughtfully: is the information biased or Compared to objective, useful and other articles (7.5 reliable or not? How does the source compare points) with other reviewed articles? How is this information similar or different from other articles you have read? Was the information helpful? How? Key elements are not well described but are present: is the information biased or objective, useful and reliable or not? How does the source compare with other reviewed articles? How is this information similar or different from other articles you have read? Was the information helpful? How? Key elements are present but superficial: is the information biased or objective, useful and reliable or not? How does the source compare with other reviewed articles? How is this information similar or different from other articles you have read? Was the information helpful? How? Missing key elements: is the information biased or objective, useful and reliable or not? How does the source compare with other reviewed articles? How is this information similar or different from other articles you have read? Was the information helpful? How? Summary (20 points) 20 points 14 points 7.5 points 0 points Summary Overall Synthesis of all 5 research articles Key Elements: Thorough and complete discussion about the quality of the articles (level of evidence), overall findings, what research still needs to be done on your topic, identifies gaps in care, addresses health promotion pertinent for area, analyzes interventions for populations. Did the article change your thinking about your research topic? Discusses each article individually, with some evaluation of quality and needed research. Did the article change your thinking about your research topic? Addresses a gap in care of population, few health promotion or prevention issues, few interventions for population Includes most of the articles, spotty evaluation of the articles, no research identified, limited discussion if view changed on the topic. Limited analysis/summary with focus on gaps identified, health prevention/promotion or interventions Does not include the summary of all 5 articles, no evaluation of quality of the articles, no needed research identified, limited discussion addressing gaps in care, health promotion/prevention or interventions. Did not address if view on topic has changed Use Polit Box20.1, p. 457 as guide , (11th ed Box 21.1, p. 465) (20 points) 10.2020 DNP 816 Matrix and Summary Rubric SCHOLARLY WRITING (20 points) 10 points (each category below is worth 10) 7.5 points (each below are worth 7.5 pts in this category) 5 points 0 points (each below are worth (each below are worth 0 5 pts in this category) pts in this category) Writing quality (10 points) No grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. Succinct Almost no grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. Nearly succinct A few grammatical Many grammatical, spelling or punctuation spelling or punctuation errors. errors. Too brief or not succinct APA Format (10 points) Source is consistently documented in APA format Source is accurately documented but a few minor errors noted Multiple errors in accuracy and APA format. TOTAL Points= 100 10.2020 Sources are neither accurately documented nor in APA Format Links to critical appraisal tools to evaluate research quality: Joanna Briggs Institute (joannabriggs.org) Joanna Briggs Institute (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) CASP checklists (Links to an external site.) Mixed Method appraisal checklist McGill: (Links to an external site.) Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center Legend tools- very helpful (Links to an external site.) Johns Hopkins EBP Models and Tools References Bragg, L., Bugajski, A., Marchese, M., Caldwell, R., Houle, L., Thompson, R. , Chula, R. , Keith, C. & Lengerich, A. (2016). How do patients perceive hourly rounding?. Nursing Management (Springhouse), 47(11), 11–13. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000502807.60295.c5. Brosey, L. A., & March, K. S. (2015). Effectiveness of structured hourly nurse rounding on patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. Journal of nursing care quality, 30(2), 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000086 Brosinski, C., & Riddell, A. (2020). Incorporating Hourly Rounding to Increase Emergency Department Patient Satisfaction: A Quality Improvement Approach. Journal of emergency nursing, 46(4), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2019.08.004 Daniels, J. F. (2016). Purposeful and timely nursing rounds: a best practice implementation project. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 14(1), 248– 267.https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir2016-2537 Francis K, Kurtsev A, Walter D, Steele C, Staines C (2019) Nurses' Experiences and Perceptions of Hourly Rounding: A Private Australian Catholic Hospital Single Case Study. Int Arch Nurs Health Care 5:125. doi.org/10.23937/2469-5823/1510125 Goldsack, J., Bergey, M., Mascioli, S., & Cunningham, J. (2015). Hourly rounding and patient falls: what factors boost success?. Nursing, 45(2), 25– 30.https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NURSE.0000459798.79840.95 Hicks, D. (2015). Can rounding reduce patient falls in acute care? An integrative literature review. MEDSURG Nursing, 24(1),51-55 Krepper, R., Vallejo, B., Smith, C., Lindy, C., Fullmer, C., Messimer, S., Xing, Y., & Myers, K. (2014). Evaluation of a standardized hourly rounding process (SHaRP). Journal for Healthcare Quality 36(2), 62-69. doi: 10.1111/j.1945-1474.2012. 00222.x LeLaurin, J. H., & Shorr, R. I. (2019). Preventing Falls in Hospitalized Patients: State of the Science. ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2019.01.007 Mitchell, M. D., Lavenberg, J. G., Trotta, R. L., & Umscheid, C. A. (2014). Hourly rounding to improve nursing responsiveness: a systematic review. The Journal of nursing administration, 44(9), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000101 Morgan, L., Flynn, L., Robertson., New, S., Forde-Johnston, C., & McCulloch, P. (2017). Intentional Rounding: a staff -led quality improvement intervention in the prevention of patient falls. Journal of Clinical Nursing 26(1-2),115-124.https//:doi-org/10.1111/jocn.13401 Slade, S. C., Carey, D. L., Hill, A. M., & Morris, M. E. (2017). Effects of falls prevention interventions on falls outcomes for hospitalized adults: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis. BMJ open, 7(11), e017864. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017864 Toole, N., Meluskey, T., & Hall, N. (2015). A systematic review: barriers to hourly rounding. Journal of Nursing Management, 24(3), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12332 PICOT QUESTION– Does purposeful hourly rounding reduce falls and increase patient satisfaction compared to waiting for patient’s call lights in hospitalized elderly patients within 6 months? P : Population == hospitalized elderly patients . I : Intervention==purposeful hourly rounding. C : Comparison ==waiting for patients call light. O : Outcome === reduce falls/injuries and improve patient's satisfaction. T : Time frame ==6 months . 1 Article Matrix and Analysis Student Name: Used with Permission College of Health and Human Services-School of Nursing, Northern Kentucky University DNP 816: Analysis & Application of Health Data for ANP Dr. Faculty Name September 20, 2020 Summer 2019 2 Article Matrix and Analysis Student Name: XXXXX PICO Question: In adult patients with diabetes (P), how does strict glucose monitoring and treatment regimens (I), when compared to decreased compliance to home treatment i.e. routine glucose monitoring, medication adherence and nutritional changes (C), affect and influence patient quality of life through improvement in treatment education and expectations (O) over one year (T)? Search process: I utilized the NKU online library to search for articles. The data bases included CINHAL and MEDLINE PLUS. These are peer-reviewed, current and reputable search engines that provided the most accurate and reliable articles for the assignment. Search terms: Patients with diabetes AND adherence OR compliance to treatment OR management; noncompliance OR nonadherence in diabetic treatment AND effects on quality of life; compliance to diabetic treatment AND management AND importance OR significance Data bases: CINHAL COMPLETE and MEDLINE Total number of articles obtained from search results: N=11,568 Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N=37 (out of first 100 relevant) Number of articles reviewed: N=9 Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N=7,868 Inclusion Criteria: Must be in English, full ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.

OUTLINE

1

Outline
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Instructor’s Name
Course
Due Date

OUTLINE

1
Outline

I.

Introduction
a. Article Matrix and Analysis

II.

Articles Review
a. This section covered the five selected and reviewed articles based on the PICOT
Question with each part as instructed in the rubric.

III.

Summary and Analysis of Article Matrix
a. This section presents a summary of the reviewed articles in the Article Matrix and
Analysis section above.

IV.

References


1

Article Matrix and Analysis

Used with Permission
College of Health and Human Services-School of Nursing, Northern Kentucky University
DNP 816: Analysis and Application of Health Data for APRN Practice
September 20, 2020

2

Article Matrix and Analysis
Student Name: XXXXXX
PICO Question: Does purposeful hourly rounding (I) reduce falls and increase patient satisfaction (O) compared to waiting for patient’s call
lights (C) in hospitalized elderly patients (P) within 6 months (T)?
Search process: Data base search was done using Northern Kentucky University library. Boolean phrases were used. Articles were assessed
based on abstract and criteria listed below until five articles were left.
Search terms: Purposeful hourly rounding, hourly rounding, hospitalized elderly, fall prevention.
Databases: CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE and EBSCOhost
Total number of articles obtained from search results: N=14/ N=15 N= 20
Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N=5/N=5
Number of articles reviewed: N= 4/N=5
Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N=20/N=8 N=20
Inclusion Criteria: The articles must be in English language, Full text only, Articles published within the past five years, Peer reviewed
Exclusion Criteria: Article published in more than five years ago, Not in English Language, No full text link, Not peer reviewed, Duplicate
article, Non-research article
Studies included in systematic review or meta-analysis- N = 1

3

Author, year;
Credentials
Article #1
Article
Focus/Title
Research
Design/Interve
ntion
Level of
Evidence
Sample/# of
subjects

Evaluation
Tool
Data
Collection
procedure
Type of
Instrument
Reliability and
Validity
Data Analysis

Karen Francis, Rn, PhD, Andriy Kurtsev, Donna Walter, Cara Steele and Carolyn Staines. (2019). Published in the International
Achieves of Nursing and Health Care (2019).
Nurse’s Experiences and Perceptions of Hourly Rounding: A Private Australian Catholic Hospital Single Case Study.
A qualitative, exploratory descriptive single case study design: No intervention

Level IV
The participants included all the nurses working at a private Australian Catholic hospital, and who were implementing hourly
rounding, during a 12-month implementation period were eligible to participate in the research. 15 Nurses participated in this study.
Participation was voluntary and the researchers accommodated the time releases from work for the study. The ward in the hospital
used for this study have a team nursing model care, the team typically comprise of two registered nurses. Each team was allocated
patients to whom they looked after for total patient care.
**CASP for randomized control trial Score 11/11
The research team conducted a confidential individual interview using Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenological interview
approach. The interview took five weeks in the late 2015 and was based on set of questions that where possible allowed probing to
explore the participants’ responses or seek clarification. Interviews were recorded using digital methods.
Hermeneutic phenomenological interviews were done using a set of questions that allowed the researcher to probe the respondent for
clarification or further exploration.
The study was approved by the organization’s Human Research Ethics Committee of St John of God Healthcare.
The collected data was recorded digitally and then transcribed verbatim. The research team examined textual data using content and
thematic analysis techniques. Each transcript was read many times to familiarize the reader with the text. Then content analysis was
done which generated an overview of the transcript and line by line thematic analysis leading to the distillation of key phrases or codes
reflecting respondents’ experiences. The team further interrogated these categories, and like codes were grouped and assigned
descriptive titles that resembled the theme. All analyses were then compared with placing same ideas under existing code or new code
that better matched the central theme.
Implicit and explicit ideas embedded in the texts were isolated, facilitating explication of the phenomenon of interest. The key interest
was Nurses’ experience and perceptions of hourly rounding.

4

Results/Theme
s

The experience and perceptions of the nurse respondents involved in the investigation based mainly on the following themes: i)
Support for rounding practice. ii) barriers to rounding practice which included documentation, high workload and time pressure.
Themes: blended educational program; improving medication adherence
Discussion/
The investigation revealed that the rounding protocol was perceived to be useful and was supported by the respondents. However,
Significance/
there were challenges in complying with the protocol. Among the challenges are heavy workloads and busy wards made it difficult to
Limitations
implement rounding visits on an hourly basis. Moreover, the requirement to document is also a burden. Successful implementation of
this techniques requires adequate and consistent communication and education in the health care setting.
Limitation: The data collection was only limited to only a single time point for instance, by following the completion of the 12-month
implementation period. Therefore, Nurses’ perceptions should have been captured several times throughout the period to reveal
changes in perceptions.
Helpful/Reliabl The study is helpful. The findings are significant with appropriate analysis and interpretation of results. Clear findings because they
e/Compared to highlight the limitations and gaps. The study presents an evaluation of nurses’ perceptions and experience, showing that nurses were
other art
supportive of the hourly rounding. Helpful, reliable, results were statistically significant. Clear statement of findings.
Compared to other articles: Consistent findings in regard to the perception on the effectiveness of purposeful hourly rounding in
reduction of patient fall and satisfaction (Susan et al. 2017).
Author, year;
Credentials,
Article #2
Article
Focus/Title
Research
Design/Interve
ntion
Level of
Evidence
Sample/# of
subjects
Evaluation
Tool

Susan C Slade, David L Carey, Anne-Marie Hill and Meg E. Morris (2017).

Effects of falls prevention interventions on falls outcomes for hospitalized adults: Protocol for a Systematic review with meta-analysis.
A systematic review
Intervention: The study reviewed interventions pertaining falls prevention including education, exercises, functional assistance, health
professional education, medications either withdrawing or delivered for falls prevention or multifactorial combinations of the
preceding strategies. The interventions must have been implemented in the hospital settings.
Level I
The researcher were to review previous studies.

5

Data
Collection
procedure

Type of
Instrument
Reliability and
Validity
Data Analysis

Studies were included only if they were in English language, they include hospitalized adults aged over 21 years or hospital staff.
Exclusion include studies conducted in a hospice, palliative care, pediatric ward, home or residential care facility.
Studies were searched in online databases like CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE etc., The researchers also tracked reference lists and
citations of relevant studies to identify additional papers, and content experts were consulted.
The search included materials up to March 2017 using explosion and combinations of key search terms including, falls, hospitals,
prevention, etc. Studies to be documented using PRISMA compliant flow chart. Search results were then downloaded to reference
database. The team deleted duplicates and one reviewer screened titles by applying priori eligibility criteria. Two independent
researchers then screened titles and other abstracts of the remaining references and performed full-text reviews to identify studies that
meet the criteria. Any disagreement was resolved in the discussion and a third reviewer if the team fail to reach consensus.
Electronic database was searched for the studies. Questionnaire: ten questions related to the demographic information of the
participants.
Ethical approval was not necessary since the systematic review was to be published in a peer reviewed journal and disseminated
electronically in print and at conferences. Updates will guide healthcare translation into practice.
The search included materials up to March 2017 using explosion and combinations of key search terms including, falls, hospitals,
prevention, etc. Studies to be documented using PRISMA compliant flow chart. Search results were then downloaded to reference
database. The team deleted duplicates and one reviewer screened titles by applying priori eligibility criteria. Two independent
researchers then screened titles and other abstracts of the remaining references and performed full-text reviews to identify studies that
meet the criteria. Any disagreement was resolved in the discussion and a third

Results/Theme
s
Discussion/
Significance/
Limitations
Helpful/Reliabl Helpful but cautious, small sample size and no credentials of the authors contributes to lack of validity, clear statement of findings.
e/Compared to Compared to other articles: Consistent with Francis et al., 2019).
other art
Author, year;
Credentials,
Article #3

Linda Bragg, MSN, RN; Andrew Bugajski, BSN, RN; Matthew Marchese, BSN, RN; Randall Caldwell, MBC; Lisa Houle, MHA,

Article
Focus/Title

How Do Patients perceive hourly rounding?

RRT; Raylene Thompson, BS, CPhT; Ranay Chula; Corey Keith, MSN, RN; and Alex Lengerich, MS (2016).

6

Research
Design/Interve
ntion
Level of
Evidence
Sample/# of
subjects
Evaluation
Tool
Data
Collection
procedure
Type of
Instrument
Reliability and
Validity

Cross-sectional study- no intervention

III
Study was done in six hospitals located in the same geographical area. Patients from 6 hospitals.

Research assistants read questions on the Baptist health Hourly Rounding Checklist (BCHHRC) to patients and recorded their
responses. The questions covered four areas of concern namely; occurrence, ex...


Anonymous
Very useful material for studying!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4