Patient Preference and Decision Making Assignment

Review the Resources and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan. Patient Preference and Decision Making Assignment

Discussion: Patient Preferences and Decision Making

Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populations that are often well informed and educated, even before consulting or considering a healthcare need delivered by a health professional. Fueled by this, health professionals are increasingly involving patients in treatment decisions. However, this often comes with challenges, as illnesses and treatments can become complex.

What has your experience been with patient involvement in treatment or healthcare decisions?

In this Discussion, you will share your experiences and consider the impact of patient involvement (or lack of involvement). You will also consider the use of a patient decision aid to inform best practices for patient care and healthcare decision making.

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan.

Review the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/.

Choose “For Specific Conditions,” then Browse an alphabetical listing of decision aids by health topic.

NOTE: To ensure compliance with HIPAA rules, please DO NOT use the patient’s real name or any information that might identify the patient or organization/practice. Patient Preference and Decision Making Assignment

By Day 3 of Week 8

Post a brief description of the situation you experienced and explain how incorporating or not incorporating patient preferences and values impacted the outcome of their treatment plan. Be specific and provide examples. Then, explain how including patient preferences and values might impact the trajectory of the situation and how these were reflected in the treatment plan. Finally, explain the value of the patient decision aid you selected and how it might contribute to effective decision making, both in general and in the experience you described. Describe how you might use this decision aid inventory in your professional practice or personal life.

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 7, “Patient Concerns, Choices and Clinical Judgement in Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 219–232)

Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(13), 1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10186. Retrieved from https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1910118

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001396. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788386/

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000483

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00730.x

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_6052_Module05_Week09_Assignment_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Part 5: Recommending an Evidence-Based Practice Change

Create an 8- to 9-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

· Briefly describe your healthcare organization, including its culture and readiness for change.
· Describe the current problem or opportunity for change. Include in this description the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general.
18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a healthcare organization, including a detailed explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a current problem or opportunity for change.

An accurate, specific, and detailed description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with change implementation in general is provided.
16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
The presentation accurately describes a healthcare organization, including an accurate explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

The presentation accurately describes a current problem or opportunity for change.

An accurate description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided.
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a healthcare organization, including an inaccurate or vague explanation of its culture and readiness for change.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a current problem or opportunity for change.

An inaccurate or vague description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided.
0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a healthcare organization, including an inaccurate and vague explanation of its culture and readiness for change, or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a current problem or opportunity for change or is missing.

An inaccurate and vague description of the circumstances surrounding the need for change, the scope of the issue, the stakeholders involved, and the risks associated with the change implementation in general is provided or is missing.
· Propose an evidence-based idea for a change in practice using an evidence-based practice approach to decision making. Note that you may find further research needs to be conducted if sufficient evidence is not discovered.
· Describe your plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation.
· Describe the measurable outcomes you hope to achieve with the implementation of this evidence-based change.
· Be sure to provide APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles you selected to support your thinking.
32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
The presentation clearly and accurately proposes in detail an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is fully aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a detailed plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that is specific.

The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change.

The presentation includes accurate, complete, and full APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected.
28 (28%) – 31 (31%)
The presentation accurately proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is adequately aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

The presentation accurately describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that is adequate.

The presentation accurately describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based changes.

The presentation includes accurate APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected.
25 (25%) – 27 (27%)
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that may be aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption and implementation that may be relevant.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change.

Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected are provided.
0 (0%) – 24 (24%)
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely proposes an evidence-based idea for a change in practice that is not aligned to an evidence-based practice approach for decision making or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes a plan for knowledge transfer of this change, including a plan for knowledge creation, dissemination, and organizational adoption that implementation that is incomplete, or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes the measurable outcomes desired for the implementation of the evidence-based change or is missing.

Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations of the supporting evidence-based peer-reviewed articles selected are provided or are missing.
Add a lessons learned section that includes:

· A summary of the critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed articles you previously submitted.
· What did you learn from completing the evaluation table?
· What did you learn from completing the levels of evidence table?
· What did you learn from completing the outcomes synthesis table?
27 (27%) – 30 (30%)
The presentation clearly and accurately summarizes in detail the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table that is specific.

The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that is specific.

The presentation thoroughly describes in detail at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that is specific.

The presentation provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on the lessons learned explained. The presentation fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the presentation.
24 (24%) – 26 (26%)
The presentation accurately summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table that may include some specificity.

The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that may include some specificity.

The presentation accurately describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that may include some specificity.

The presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed related to the lessons learned explained. The presentation integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the presentation.
21 (21%) – 23 (23%)
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table and may lack some specificity.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table and may lack some specificity.

The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table and may lack some specificity.

The presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the lessons learned explained. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the presentation.
0 (0%) – 20 (20%)
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the critical appraisal process of the peer-reviewed articles previously submitted or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the evaluation table and lacks specificity or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the levels of evidence table that lacks specificity or is missing.

The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes at least one lesson learned from completing the outcomes synthesis table that lacks specificity or is missing.

The presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of no outside resources related to the lessons learned explained or is missing. The presentation fails to incorporate any resources to support the responses provided.
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.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriptive.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting—The paper follows correct format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct paper formatting with no errors.
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) paper formatting errors.
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) paper formatting errors.
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) paper formatting errors.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6052_Module05_Week09_Assignment_Rubric

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument. Patient Preference and Decision Making Assignment

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.

Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.

APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.

LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.

Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.

Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. Patient Preference and Decision Making Assignment.