Feb 23, 2024 DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities
DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities
DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities
Examples of scholarly activities include attending conferences, seminars, grand rounds, participating in policy and quality improvement committees, writing scholarly publications, participating in community planning, serving as a guest lecturer, etc. Involvement in and contribution to interdisciplinary initiatives are also acceptable scholarly activities.
Throughout the DNP program, learners are required to provide a report documenting participation in a minimum of four scholarly activities outside of clinical or professional practice. These reports will be due in specific courses throughout the program, as described below, and must be documented in your Practice Portfolio by the end of each course in which an activity report is due.
Documentation of these activities is required in DNP-810, DNP-820, DNP-830, and DNP-840.
A summary report of the scholarly activity, including who, what, where, when and take home points, will be submitted as the assignment. Include the appropriate program competencies associated with the scholarly activity and future professional goals related to this activity. You may use the “Scholarly Activity Summary” template to help guide this assignment.
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Meet my deadline
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: DNP 830 Topic 8 Assignment Scholarly Activities
Overview
Participation in scholarly activities like team meetings and conferences is essential for advanced practice nurses (Kleinpell, 2021). The scholarly activity that I participated in was a filter meeting in the organization where I had my practicum. Filter meetings involve interdisciplinary teams that meet at regular times based on organizational procedures and processes to discuss selected issues and variances by the quality improvement team because of their adverse effects on the quality of care offered.
These events also include “never events” like falls, hospital-acquired infections, and delays in care provision. The interdisciplinary team consisted of 13 standing members with leaders from departments where such events come to offer detailed explanations concerning the issues to be discussed. The purpose of the filter meetings is to analyze an event determine gaps and procedural issues leading to the occurrence and assign a harm score.
The meeting targets hospital management and leadership and the interdisciplinary Filter team to review cases for lessons learned to seek corrective measures and prevent future occurrences. The meeting offered benefits to me as a nurse as I increased my understanding of the importance of continuous quality improvement and how facilities determine ratings like SSE (serious safety events based on a scale of 1 to 5. Exposure through this session had significant effects on my evaluation and perspective about any situation that can occur in my practice setting.
Problem
The meeting had six cases for evaluation and review to determine the best course of action for nurses and those involved:
Patient falls (2)
Medication error (1)
Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) (2)
Wrong site surgical procedure (1)
The Filter Committee reviewed each case based on facts heard from the leaders of the respective affected areas who were in attendance. The committee used algorithms for each event based on questions to determine its rank or rating based on the SSE (1-5), a Potential Safety Event (1-5), and a Good Catch.
Solution
Patient Falls: all the falls had inconsistent scores and the meeting solved that the providers will require a reeducation session to avoid such events.
Medication error: scored a Good Catch and the meeting suggested more education on the unit and its staff.
Hospital-acquired infections: Both scored an SSE2, with recommendations that the providers review the medication charting system and communication among nurses
Wrong site procedure: The score was PSE2 with the team identifying possible disparities and gaps. The nurse manager was tasked to review and update the current policy and educate the nursing staff.
Opportunity
The scholarly activity enhanced my understanding of how healthcare teams and facilities use the harm score and develop quality improvement protocols to enhance the overall quality of care while reducing the occurrence of adverse events like falls and HAIs (Lucchini et al., 2020). The meeting also enlightened me on the genesis of hospital policies on a raft of issues and operational activities and the requisite guidelines that organizations offer to their healthcare workers to deal with them (Grace, 2022).
The activity also offered me a chance to meet several competencies based on my Individual Success Plan (ISP). I met the competence of the professional role (Domain 1) as experienced how inter-professional collaboration works in real nursing practice situations. The meeting allowed physicians, nurse leaders, and departmental managers from different areas to address the reported issues and offer solutions (Jowsey et al., 2020).
The meeting also offered me a chance to meet competence 1.1 on assuming managerial and leadership roles to promote patient safety and quality care as well as 1.3 which entails participation in policy development to positively impact nursing practice and quality care delivery (1.4).
The meeting offered me a chance to understand and experience the theoretical foundations of nursing practice as captured in Domain 2. It advanced my perspective and understanding of valuing processes like critical thinking and problem-solving approaches, use of ethical decisions, and reasoning when handling diverse patients in practice (2.3).
The meeting also allowed me to improve my communication competencies as expected in Domain 4; especially 4.3 as I experienced professional collaboration and the requisite communication approaches used by the providers. The interdisciplinary approach to the six cases reviewed during the meeting demonstrated that healthcare professionals can enhance care delivery by working as a team (Grace, 2022). Such teams are also essential in enhancing communication and quality care improvement through policy-based and evidence-backed interventions.
The overall experience of this scholarly activity will allow me to focus on deliberate ways to improve the management of aspects like falls and when they happen in my practice setting (Oktaria et al., 2023). The scholarly activity was essential in building a team-based approach and embracing the interdisciplinary concept for effective quality care delivery (Chinn et al., 2022). The meeting demonstrated that nurses do not work in a vacuum as they require all professionals in healthcare to work with them for quality care delivery.
Program Competencies Addressed
Based on the Individual Success Plan (ISP), the scholarly activity addressed core competencies comprising 1.1, 1.3, 2.3, and 4.3. These competencies are critical for nurses to succeed in their practice and offer expected quality patient care. For instance, working in interdisciplinary teams requires one to hone and use critical thinking attributes and be an effective communicator.
References
Chinn, P. L., Kramer, M. K., & Sitzman, K. (2021). Knowledge development in nursing e-book:
theory and process. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Grace, P. J. (2022). Nursing ethics and professional responsibility in advanced practice. Jones &
Bartlett Learning.
Jowsey, T., Foster, G., Cooper-Ioelu, P., & Jacobs, S. (2020). Blended learning via distance in
pre-registration nursing education: A scoping review. Nurse education in practice, 44, 102775. DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102775
Kleinpell, R. M. (Ed.). (2021). Outcome assessment in advanced practice nursing. Springer
Publishing Company.
Lucchini, A., Giani, M., Elli, S., Villa, S., Rona, R., & Foti, G. (2020). Nursing Activities Score
Is increased in COVID-19 patients. Intensive & critical care nursing, 59, 102876.
DOI: 10.1016/j.iccn.2020.102876
Oktaria, S. D., Badeni, B., & Alexon, A. (2023). Blended Learning Is a Great Solution for Future
Learning Model after COVID-19 in Indonesia. International Journal of Multicultural and Multi-Religious Understanding, 10(5), 31-43.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v10i5.4605
Topic 8 DQ 2
There are several issues that undermine clients’ rights to make genetic and genomic-related
decisions and then take action. Identify two issues that you have seen undermine these rights in
your clinical setting. What are potential solutions for each? What is your role as the patient
advocate with each issue? Explain. Support your rationale with a minimum of two scholarly
sources.
REPLY TO DISCUSSION
Unread
CAT: Is there anything from the material this week that left you with questions?
Unread
LAST DAY!!! I cannot believe it!!! Make sure you turn in all assessments today and participate in
the discussions up to today.
Unread
Genetic and genomic applications are diverse and generalizing about the psychosocial harms of
testing in these areas is challenging. Some interrelated factors about genetic and genomic testing must be understood. The first regards the characteristics of the genetic variants themselves, including the likelihood of developing a health condition when the variant is present and the range of severity in the health outcome when the variant is present. These bear on what risk information would be conveyed to an individual who has undergone the testing and how serious those results
would be. A second factor concerns the nature of the health condition with which the variant is associated. It is one thing to test for cystic fibrosis and another to test for type 2 diabetes; each has its own range of health impacts, prognosis, and prevention or treatment options. The purpose of the testing is the goal to diagnose an already existing set of symptoms, assess risk for future disease, facilitate an intervention to prevent a disease from occurring.
The context in which the testing is done is the test being conducted in a clinical setting with an individual who already has a familial risk for a disease, or is it being applied as a large-scale population screen among individuals with unknown prior risk. The impact of genetic and genomic testing has examined its use as a means of predicting and preventing a disease in pre-symptomatic individuals, the testing is often used to assist in narrowing down or confirming a diagnosis for individuals who are already experiencing symptoms.
In the midst of symptom management and diagnostic processes, there is less likely to be time to conduct extensive genetic counseling or space for emotional processing by patients. Therefore, it is valuable to consider how the response of symptomatic patients to genetic and genomic testing may differ from other testing contexts American Society of Human
Genetics,2020).
Genetic testing can provide only limited information about an inherited condition. The test often
cannot determine if a person will show symptoms of a disorder, how severe the symptoms will be, or whether the disorder will progress over time. Another major limitation is the lack of treatment strategies for many genetic disorders once they are diagnosed. Many of the risks associated with genetic testing involve the emotional, social, or financial consequences of the test results.
People may feel angry, depressed, anxious, or guilty about their results. In some cases, genetic testing creates tension within a family because the results can reveal information about other family members in addition to the person who is tested. The possibility of genetic discrimination in employment or insurance is also a concern (F. Vansenne, P. M. Bossuyt, and C. A. de Borgie, 2019).
References
American Society of Human Genetics, American College of Medical Genetics. (2020). Points to
consider: Ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and
adolescents. American Journal of Human Genetics, 57, 1233-1241.
F. Vansenne, P. M. Bossuyt, and C. A. de Borgie, “Evaluating the Psychological Effects of Genetic
Testing in Symptomatic Patients: A Systematic Review,” Genetic Testing and Molecular
Biomarkers 13 (2019): 555– 63.
Unread
Thanks for your post and the enlightenment of these facts. In addition, although genetic
testing can provide important information for diagnosing, treating, and preventing illness, there
are limitations. For example, if you’re a healthy person, a positive result from genetic testing
doesn’t always mean you will develop a disease. On the other hand, in some situations, a
negative result doesn’t guarantee that you won’t have a certain disorder. However, talking to a
doctor, a medical geneticist, or a genetic counselor about what the patient will do with the
results is an important step in the process of genetic testing.
Order a similar assignment, and have writers from our team of experts write it for you, guaranteeing you an A
