Translate the Evidence into Practice

Assignment 3: Translate the Evidence into Practice

The next steps in the evidence-based practice (EBP) process includes implementing and translating the intervention chosen in the PICOT question (found below) into the clinical setting. Pilot projects are often used before implementation to an entire organization. Discuss the following questions related to implementing the chosen PICOT intervention as if a pilot test project was being facilitated by the masters prepared nurse: The PICOT question for the current study is: Regarding patients in the hospital setting who have received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours or more (P), how does chlorhexidine-containing products for oral healthcare of ventilated patients (I) compare to usual/traditional oral healthcare products (C) and affect the incidence of ventilator acquired pneumonia (O) within the patient’s hospital stay (T)? Assignment Criteria: 1. Discuss two (2) strategies the masters prepared nurse would implement to create a vision for change related to the new intervention. 2. Describe the stakeholders in the pilot project. 3. Propose two (2) strategies that would promote engagement of the stakeholders in the project. 4. Discuss how the barriers of the project would be assessed. 5. Discuss how the identified barriers would be eliminated. 6. Identify major organizational resources needed for the pilot project. 7. Discuss how the outcome of the intervention will be measured. 8. The scholarly paper should be in narrative format, 4 pages excluding the title and reference page. 9. Include an introductory paragraph, purpose statement, and a conclusion. 10. Include level 1 and 2 headings to organize the paper. 11. Write the paper in third person, not first person (meaning do not use ‘we’ or ‘I’) and in a scholarly manner. To clarify: I, we, you, me, our may not be used. In addition, describing yourself as the researcher or the author should not be used. 12. Include a minimum of four (4) professional peer-reviewed scholarly journal references to support the paper (review in Ulrich Periodical Directory) and be less than five (5) years old.