Humanities class , a compare/contrast analysis essay

Description of Course Outcome

Category Type

Description of Category

DNP Essential

DNP Program Outcome

Problem Identification

A

Collaborating with experts in practice to identify a clinical problem.

I, VI

1, 2, 6

Problem Identification

B

Applying advanced communication skills to identify a quality improvement initiative in a health care setting.

II

7

Problem Identification

C

Analyzing health care data to identify gaps of care for individuals, aggregates, or populations.

VII

4

Literature Review

D

Engaging in scholarly inquiry to develop a PICO question.

I

2, 6

Literature Review

E

Engaging in scholarly inquiry to identify evidence-based practice to utilize to improve patient outcomes.

I, III

2, 3, 6

Literature Review

F

Collaborating with experts in practice using analytic methods to critically appraise research to determine best evidence for practice.

II, III, VI

1, 3, 7

Advanced Nursing Practice

G

Attending a conference to gain insight on evidence-based practice in relation to identified clinical problem (possible activity for Essential VIII).

VIII

5

Description of Course Outcome

Category Type

Description of Category

DNP Essential

DNP Program Outcome

Project Planning [Assessments]

A

Employing principles of health policy to develop effective plans for a practice-level change to improve quality of care.

II

7

Project Planning [Assessments]

B

Employing leadership skills within interprofessional teams to analyze organizational issues.

VI

1

Project Planning [Assessments]

C

Evaluating a care delivery model to identify gaps of care for individuals, aggregates or populations.

VII

4

Project Planning [Assessments]

D

Using analytical skills to assess the relationships among practice, process, fiscal, and policy issues at an organization.

V, VIII

5, 9

Project Design

E

Integrating theory into practice through the development of a quality improvement project.

I

2, 6

Project Design

F

Applying findings generated through scholarly inquiry to design a quality improvement project.

III

3

Project Design

G

Designing an evaluative plan to monitor outcomes of a quality improvement project through the use of health care information systems.

III, IV

3, 8

Advanced Nursing Practice

H

Attending a conference in relation to identified clinical problem to gain insight on how to inform practice decisions and support the understanding of patient care consequences (possible activity for Essential VIII).

VIII

5

Description of Course Outcome

Category Type

Description of Category

DNP Essential

DNP Program Outcome

Project Implementation

A

Functioning as a practice specialist through the implementation of a quality improvement project.

III

3

Project Implementation

B

Applying advanced communication skills to lead a quality improvement initiative in a health care setting.

II

7

Project Implementation

C

Providing leadership to influence health policy within the health care system through demonstrating evidence-based practice.

V

9

Project Implementation

D

Mentoring health care professionals to enhance patient outcomes through the use of evidence-based practice.

VIII

5

Project Implementation

E

Educating health care professionals regarding the transitioning to evidence based practice.

VIII

5

Project Evaluation

F

Demonstrating advanced levels of clinical judgement through the evaluation of evidence-based initiatives to improve patient outcomes.

IV, VIII

5, 8

Project Dissemination

G

Providing leadership to influence health policy within the health care system through the dissemination of findings from quality improvement project.

V

9

Project Dissemination

H

Functioning as a practice specialist through the dissemination of findings from quality improvement project.

III

3

Advanced Nursing Practice

I

Attending a conference to disseminate findings from quality improvement project to facilitate optimal care and patient outcomes across diverse settings (possible activity for Essential VIII).

VIII

5

Date

*Post 704

Start Time - End Time

On- Site

Off- Site

Daily Hours Accumulated

Cumulative Hours

PE Category Type

Practice Experience Activity - Narrative

*01/18/21

7p-7:10p

x

10 min

10 min

A

Contacted the IRB advisor via Chatham email

*02/01/21-

*02/28/21

5p-11p

x

6

6h 10m

A

An IRB exempt form submission was initiated via Cayuse. All the required fields and categories were inputted electronically. The research plan, procedures, list of materials, were described and the cover letter were attached. The IRB reliance agreement and the site permission was attached. The main study design and the pretest and posttest was attached in English and Spanish. The recruitment, data collection, storage and release were described and inputted. The consent, risk and benefits and additional documents were attached for IRB review.

*02/28/21

8a-3p

x

7

13h 10m

A

Received feedback from the IRB advisor regarding the submitted IRB Exempt documents and electronic form. On 02/28/21, all the corrections were reviewed and revised. The clinical site was contacted on the same day to request the permission letter to attach to Cayuse.

*02/27/21

9am-3pm

x

6 hours

19h 10m

I

Attended a national conference: 2021 ACG/FGS Virtual Annual Spring Symposium about current issue facing the industry regarding colorectal cancer, discussed the risk factors, the options for screenings and background.

*03/02/21

*03/03/21

8:32pm-9:32p

7:00p-8:00p

x

1

1

21 hr 10m

A

Received multiple emails from the IRB advisor regarding the additional corrections that were needed. The documents and corrections were reviewed and revised in Cayuse. An email from manager at the clinical site was received with the permission form. The form was attached to Cayuse for review. On 03/03/21, the IRB advisor and the project leader (PL) both certified the submission.

*03/23/21

9p-9:10p

x

10m

21h 20m

Approval from the IRB was obtained.

*04/12/21

8a-2p

x

6h 40m

28

A

Reviewed the Residency Poster Presentation guidelines in the Nursing Student site. After thorough review of the guidelines, the poster presentation was developed. Scholarly inquiry review to identify published evidence on clinical problem, background, literature review summary. The additional information included the implementation steps, timeline, outcomes, plans for dissemination.

*04/19/21

11a-4:30p

x

5hr 30 min

33h 30m

A

Participated in DNP residency and scholarly exchange with peers and faculty. The presentations were broken down into small groups and all questions were answered regarding the future implementation of the projects and information regarding the start of NUR799.

*04/23/21 Comment by Nicole Hoh: Typo?

8a-8:30a

x

30 min

34

A

Prepared a summary of key items and list of activities that were needed and could be addressed prior to presenting to the clinical site (site is different from current workplace).

*04/21/21

8:30a-9:30a

x

1

35

A

Attended a scheduled phone meeting with the preceptor. Prior to the meeting, the preceptor had received and reviewed the pre/posttest questionnaire, cover letters, site permission form, flyers, bilingual telephone scripts and all questions were answered prior to presenting to the clinical site.

*4/21/21

9:30a-10:30a

x

1

36

A

Collaborated with the office manager at Alvior Medical Clinic to retrieve specific report of patient data for prospective review data organization.

*04/22/21

8a-10a

x

2

38

D

Presented to the clinical site (different from current workplace) and met with the medical director and the office manager to discuss the plan for the implementation, all the materials were reviewed in the conference room. Met with the office staff to review and educate on the flyers, cover letters, inclusion and exclusion criteria and discussed verbal consent will be needed prior to the start of the educational program. All questions were answered. DNP Project preparation of materials: making copies of patient education handouts and staff instructions.

*4/22/21

8p-11p

x

3

41

B

Prepared the PowerPoint presentation for the educational sessions regarding colorectal cancer amongst Hispanics. The educational session covered statistics, warning signs of colon cancer, the signs and symptoms, screening age, preventative measures, and screening options.

*04/23/21

8a-10a

x

2

43

D

Met with the medical director to discuss findings from initial scholarly inquiry and provide update on gap in care to identify the best evidence of clinical solutions to advance practices as it related to improving colorectal knowledge and screening amongst Hispanics.

04/26/21

Week 1

8a-9a

x

1

44

A, B, C

Recruitment began by placing flyers in the waiting area and exam rooms. Verbal consent has been obtained by PL of four patient who meet the inclusion criteria. How many patients did you screen?

04/29/21

8a-3p

x

8

52

A, B, D

Four participants who already gave verbal consent were approached and screened. All four participants agreed to participate in the educational program face-to-face. Prior to each patient arriving, from 8am-8:30 the PL called the patients to confirm the appointment times that day. The first patient arrived and was taken into the small conference room for privacy. While in the room, the patient filed out the pretest survey that took 10 minutes and the educational session began right after (20 minutes). Each participant was reminded of the project, and its outcomes. The patient completed a 10-minute posttest. Four participants were educated throughout the day for a total of 40 minutes each = 2.40 hours. During each break between the participants, the information was analyzed and inputted into Excel for documentation. The primary care provider provided approval to review all the patients that were presenting to the clinic that day that met criteria. 25 charts were reviewed, and 10 patients met criteria. All the patients were seen by the PL to receive verbal consent and to schedule either a zoom meeting and or a face-to-face educational session. Comment by Nicole Hoh: If they already gave verbal consent, weren’t they already approached and screened? Or do you mean something different by gave verbal consent… to learn more about the projets I agree to take part in the project?

04/30/21

8a-9a

x

1

53

A, B, E

Touched based with the office staff to discuss recruiting process and to answer all questions regarding verbal consent.

05/03/21

7:30a-8a

x

30m

53h 30m

C

Meeting Dr. Jonathan Alvior to discuss statistical analysis plan for data.

05/03/21

7p-7:30p

x

30m

54

A

Updated the preceptor regarding the implementation plan.

05/04/21

8a-4p

x

8

62

A, C, D

12 patients were approached and screened: 4 were eligible; 2 agreed the same day to participate in the project and education was given. 

(Not current workplace; full day seminar). Two patients agreed to participate in the project the same day and two patients were schedule for a later time for a Zoom meeting. Two patients were educated face-to-face including the educational sessions, pre/posttest questions answered. The total time was 1 hour and 20 minutes. The time in between the full day of seminars included answering questions and recruiting patients that were in the clinic the same day and the information was analyzed and inputted into Excel for documentation. The clinics database was accessed and reviewed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were reviewed, and patients were chosen. All the participants were reviewed and discussed with the medical director prior to approaching the patients on the following seminar day.

05/04/21

8p-11p

x

3

65

H

Wrote/submitted Chapter 1-2 drafts of the evidence-based change project. DNP Project (includes preparation, revisions to proposal paper based on DNP Project guidelines, revisions completed by 05/09/21). Comment by Nicole Hoh: Say something like: Refreshed and updated current statistics regarding the problem of CRC and literature review on culturally based health education to underserved populations.

05/05/21

8:30a-9:30a

x

1

66

B

Met with the primary care provider at the affiliation site to provide overview and update on the status of DNP project design and outcomes.

05/05/21

7p-7:30p

x

30m

66h 30m

B

Discussed the project implementation plan and outcome plan with the preceptor Tara Gilles, DNP, APRN, FNP-BC.

05/06/21

9a-5p

x

7

73 30 m

A, B, C, E

Discussed project information with the patients that were scheduled in the clinic at the primary care doctor’s office (not current workplace).

Discussed the project information and explained that the option of face to face and or via Zoom meeting. Three patients met inclusion criteria and the total seminar took 2 hours. The time in between the full day of seminar included answering questions and recruiting patients that were in the clinic the same day. There were 19 patients scheduled for the nurse practitioner and the primary care physician. Eight patients met inclusion criteria. The project leader (PL) presented to each room of the patients that met criteria and provided information regarding the educational program that the PL was going to present. Two patients agreed to schedule an appointment. The patients data pretest and posttest questionnaires were analyzed and inputted into Excel for documentation.

05/06/21

6p-7:30p

x

1h 30 m

75

H

Making additional copies of the pretest, posttest, and flyers for the front office staff. Called the preceptor to arrange a time to discuss the project status. Touched based with the office manager to arrange an appointment with the stakeholders.

05/08/21

4p-10p

x

6

81

A, B, C

Continue to Researched additional journals and prepared the information to reinforce the literature review. Key terms?

05/09/21

6p-11p

x

5

86

A, B, C

The journals previously reviewed were formatted/written and summarized into chapters 1 & 2 of the evidence-based practice change project.for dissemination.

05/11/21

9p-4p

x

7

93

A, B, C, E

Reviewed the patients in the EMR system that were presented to the clinic that day and reviewed all patient who met criteria. Eight patients met criteria; the primary care provider (PCP) was informed of the eligible patients. Two scheduled participants were seen by the PL via Zoom and two patients were seen in person for a total of 2 hours and 40 minutes. The rest of the hours were to analyze the data (pretest and posttest surveys), input it into an Excel spreadsheet and discuss the project with the eight patients that met criteria that day. Each patients’ data/surveys took 15 minutes to review for a total of one hour. Spoke with eight patients that were scheduled in the clinic the same day which took ten minutes to speak to each. The rest of the time was utilized for data entry and to prepare for the next seminar. The preparation included reviewing the EMR charts and scheduling appointments.

05/11/21

7p-7:30p

x

30m

93h 30m

B

Presented post-intervention data and clinical application recommendations to preceptor.

05/12/21

9a-4p

x

7

100h 30m

A, B, D

(Full day seminar) Phone calls were made post two-week intervention and to the patients that met inclusion criteria on the days the PL was not in the clinic. The list of interested patients was provided by the front desk staff. The four participants that received the educational session took approximately 15 minutes each for a total of 1 hour. There were eleven patients on the interested list. All patients were called, seven patients answered and received a verbal short education and appointments were arranged. The rest of the patients received voicemails. The total time for these calls were 2 hours. The rest of the time was to analyze the data and typing a one-page update to the preceptor per her request.

05/16/21

7p-12a

x

5

105 h 30m

H

Wrote/submitted Chapters 3-5 drafts of the evidence-based change project for review. DNP Project (includes preparation, revisions to proposal paper based on DNP Project guidelines, revisions completed by 05/16/21).Changed the theoretical underpinning of the intervention to align with the Watson Theory of Human Caring. Researched extensively on the use of Watson theory with providing care for diverse and vulnerable populations. Summarized the perspective for dissemination.

05/17/21

11a-3p

x

4

109h 30m

H

Received feedback from chapters 1-2 from the professor. The chapters were reviewed, and the revisions were discussed with the preceptor who provided guidance over the phone. Started the corrections of chapters 1-2 during this time.Worked with Faculty and Preceptor to utilize feedback to improve communication and dissemination of the project purpose and literature review.

05/18/21

8a-3p

x

7

116h 30m

A, B, E

A follow-up phone call was made within two weeks after the second educational session to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing (this ranged from a five-minute phone call to 30 minutes, depending on the participants responses).

Each new participant reminded of the project, and its outcomes. They also were told to report intent for screening. The completed forms were collected and charted in Microsoft Excel for documentation and data that will be used later. Ongoing communication amongst the team and their insight about the project and participants.  

Touched base with staff to answer questions.

05/19/21

1p-6p

x

5

121h 30m

A, B, C, E

Participants who already gave verbal consent arrived at the clinic. Each participant was taken into the small conference room for privacy. While in the room, the patient filed out the pretest survey and the educational session began right after. Each participant reminded of the project, and its outcomes. The completed pretest and posttest forms were collected and charted in Microsoft Excel for documentation and data that will be used later. A total of 2 patients were seen via zoom and two patients who met criteria were seen face to face for a total of 2 hours and 40 min. The rest of the time was spent to review and input the data in excel spreadsheet.

05/20/21

9a-10am

x

1

122h 30m

A, B, C

Three participants were called after their educational sessions that occurred two weeks prior. The follow-up phone call was made to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing (these calls took 30 minutes each).

05/24/21

11a-12p

x

1

123h 30m

H

Worked with Faculty and Preceptor to utilize feedback to improve communication and dissemination of the project theoretical foundations, project management including SWOT analysis and refining the methodology of the project in preparation for dissemination.Received feed from chapters 3-5 from the professor. The chapters were reviewed, and the revisions were discussed with the preceptor who provided guidance over the phone.

05/24/21

7p-8:30p

x

1h 30m

125

H

Verification of data for post-intervention prospective cohort of participants

05/25/21

9a-3p

x

6

131

A, B, E

14 patients were approved and screened. Three patients agreed to participate the same day. Three patients were educated face-to-face including the educational sessions, pre/posttest questions answered. The total time was 3 hours and 20 minutes. The time in between the full day of seminars included answering questions and recruiting patients that were in the clinic the same day and the information was analyzed and inputted into Excel for documentation.

05/26/21

12p-2:20p

x

2 h 20 m

133h 20m

A, B, C

Four participants were called after their educational sessions that occurred two weeks prior. The follow-up phone call was made to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing (these calls took 20 minutes for 4 patients and 30 minutes for two participants who needed questions answered).

05/30/21

5p-10p

x

5

138h 20m

H

Wrote/submitted the final Chapters 1-5 of the evidence-based change project for review. DNP Project (revisions from the professor and based on DNP Project guidelines, revisions completed by 05/30/21).Continue to refine project problem, literature review, theorical underpinnings, and project management and design for dissemination to faculty and peers.

06/01/21

7p-8p

x

1

139h 20m

A, B, C, D

Completed a thorough review of the two outcomes and reviewed the data already collected with the preceptor.

06/02/21

10a-3p

x

5

144h 20m

A, B, E

A follow-up phone call was made within two weeks after the educational session to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing. 4 patients were called to discuss intent for screening.

Each new participant reminded of the project, and its outcomes. They also were told to report intent for screening. The completed forms were collected and charted in Microsoft Excel for documentation and data that will be used later. Ongoing communication amongst the team and their insight about the project and participants.

Eight patients were called the same time for a total of 2 hours. The rest of the time was spent reviewing the Care Cloud system for eligible patients that were coming that day. 12 patients were seen in the office individually and consented to the educational session. Two of the patients agreed to the seminar the same day for a total of 1 hour and 20 minutes.

06/03/21

8a-9:40a

x

1h 40 m

146

A, B, C

Four participants were called after their educational sessions that occurred on 05/19/21. The follow-up phone call was made to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing.

06/04/21

7p-8p

x

1

147

H

A one-page project status update was written and submitted for review on 06/06/21.

06/04/21

8a-9a

x

1

148

H

Meeting over the phone with DNP preceptor, Dr. Tara Gilles. Submitted chapters 1-5 for her to review.

06/4/21

10a-4p

x

6

154

A, B

A follow-up phone call was made within two weeks after the educational session to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing. 4 patients were called to discuss intent for screening, this took 1 hour. 20 patients were approached and screened: 9 patients that were in clinic were eligible; two agreed to participate in the project and education was given. This took approximately 1hour and 40 min. Spent 1 hour discussing the project with the stakeholders regarding the need for additional participants. The two additional hours were spent reviewing the pretest and posttest scores and inputting the data in the Excel Spreadsheet.

06/05/21

8:30a-9a

x

20 m

154h 20m

A, B, E

Made additional copies of patient Information and surveys.

06/07/21

5-5:40m

x

40m

155

A, B, E

The time spent was storing the data and scheduling appointments with the potential participants.

06/08/21

8a-1p

x

5

160

A, B

The rest of the hours were to analyze the data (pretest and posttest surveys), input it into an Excel spreadsheet and discuss the project with the eight patients that met criteria that day. Each patients’ data/surveys took 15 minutes to review for a total of one hour. Spoke with 13 patients that were scheduled in the clinic the same day which took ten minutes to speak to each. The rest of the time was utilized for data entry and to prepare for the next seminar. The preparation included reviewing the EMR charts and scheduling appointments. A follow-up phone call was made within two weeks after the educational session to answer questions and to collect intent or action on CRC testing on two participants that were seen on 06/02/21.

06/11/21

6p-11p

x

5

165

H

Wrote/submitted the final Chapters 6-7 of the evidence-based change project for review. Chapters 6 & 7Prepared and initial draft of the revisions to project design in response to the needs for variations and troubleshooting obstacles. Verified data analysis, prepared tables and figures for dissemination to faculty and peers . Analyzed numerical findings from data analysis to summarize in paragraph/word format.

06/15/21

7a-8a

x

1

166

A, B, C

Presented findings to the medical director via phone call.

06/15/21

8a-2

x

6

172

A, B, C

Full day seminar- 2 patients were called to discuss intent for screening, this took 40 min. 18 patients were approached and screened: six patients that were in clinic were eligible; three agreed to participate in the project and education was given. This took approximately 2 hours. Received a call at the practicum site from one of the patients that wanted a family member to be included in the project. The participant wanted a zoom call; thus, the zoom call took extra time as the family member wanted to explain the educational session themselves; despite of the PL speaking the language- this call took 1 hour and 20 min. The two additional hours were spent reviewing the pretest and posttest scores and inputting the data in the Excel Spreadsheet

06/24/21

5p-6p

x

1

173

H

The office manager wanted to discuss the progress of the project. According to the staff and manager, the medical director is pleased with the receptive participants and is interested in the implementation of the educational program by the providers who work in his office.

06/25/21

9a-9:30

x

30m

173h 30m

A, B, C

1 patient was called to discuss intent for screening from the educational session from 06/04/21, this took 30 min to discuss as the participant wanted additional education regarding screening options.