Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.
Note: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.
Part 4B: Critical Appraisal of Research
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.
I have attached the template that must be used for part A. I have also included the references that can be used. 4 total must be selected. The template must be filled out completely with use of 4 selected references, then a 1-2 page critical appraisal to follow.
Reference options for use for the assignment. Please select 4 from the following list
Burrington, S. (2019). Nurse-driven protocol to reduce urinary catheter infections: A quality improvement project. Master's Projects and Capstones. 892.
Ghanem, A., Artime, C., Moser, M., Caceres, L., & Basconcillo, A. (2015). Holy Moley! take out that foley! Measuring compliance with a nurse-driven protocol for foley catheter removal to decrease utilization. American Journal of Infection Control, 43(6), S51. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2015.04.128
Schiessler, M. M., Darwin, L. M., Phipps, A. R., Hegemann, L. R., Heybrock, B. S., & Macfadyen, A. J. (2019). Don't have a doubt, get the catheter out: A nurse-driven CAUTI prevention protocol. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 4(4), e183. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000183
Tyson, A. F., Campbell, E. F., Spangler, L. R., Ross, S. W., Reinke, C. E., Passaretti, C. L., & Sing, R. F. (2020). Implementation of a nurse-driven protocol for catheter removal to decrease catheter-associated urinary tract infection rate in a surgical trauma ICU. Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, 35(8), 738-744. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/0885066618781304
Atkins, L., Sallis, A., Chadborn, T., Shaw, K., Schneider, A., Hopkins, S., Bunten, A., Michie, S., & Lorencatto, F. (2020). Reducing catheter-associated urinary tract infections: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators and strategic behavioural analysis of interventions. Implementation science: IS, 15(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01001-2
Durant, D. J. (2017). Nurse-driven protocols and the prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections: A systematic review. AJIC: American Journal of Infection Control, 45(12), 1331–1341. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2017.07.020
Meddings, J., Rogers, M. A., Krein, S. L., Fakih, M. G., Olmsted, R. N., & Saint, S. (2014). Reducing unnecessary urinary catheter use and other strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection: an integrative review. BMJ quality & safety, 23(4), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001774
Parker, V., Giles, M., Graham, L., Suthers, B., Watts, W., O'Brien, T., & Searles, A. (2017). Avoiding inappropriate urinary catheter use and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI): a pre-post control intervention study. BMC health services research, 17(1), 314. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2268-2
RUBRIC
Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected and analyzed by completing the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Be sure to include: · An Evaluation Table--
Excellent 45 (45%) - 50 (50%)
Good 40 (40%) - 44 (44%)
Fair 35 (35%) - 39 (39%)
Poor 0 (0%) - 34 (34%)
Part 4B: Evidence-Based Best Practices Based on your appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.--
Excellent 32 (32%) - 35 (35%)
Good 28 (28%) - 31 (31%)
Fair 25 (25%) - 27 (27%)
Poor 0 (0%) - 24 (24%)
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.--
Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.--
Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Written Expression and Formatting—The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.--
Excellent 5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Good 4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Poor 0 (0%) - 3 (3%)