EBP Project Evaluation Criteria
Intro/clinical problem: Often, pts with CKD suffer from complications as a result of their disease, coremobidities, and treatments for the diseases, inclusing Dialysis/Hemodialsyis. We found that focusing on the coremobidities such as Hyperlipidemia, HTN, DM, and obesity would in term reduce the amount and severity of complications experienced from Dialysis.
PICO question: Would nursing care/intervention/education towards patients with CKD going through hemodialysis decrease the amount/severity of the complications/severities experienced post Hemodialysis ?
Population: Patients with CKD
Intervention: Patient teaching and education / referals including support and follow up, nutritional consult, interdisciplinary team, multidisciplinary approach
Comparison: Patient having education and teaching vs Patients without guidance /teaching/ education/ support group
Outcome: Improve wirght status; improve self esteem, longevity, quislity of life; pt has better repsonse to treatment ( Dialysis /hemodialysis), less dialysis treatment due to life style changes, less overall complications related to CKD treatment.
Purpose Aim: We want to compare the effectiveness with education, support group etc vs patients who are not receiving education
The betterment of the pt and families quality of life because families are included in the patients emotional support, physical support
1. Introduction of the case study………………..5
2. PICO question Formatting Fit between PICO and case study………………5
3. Identify Proposed Nursing Intervention…….10
4. Strength of Evidence…………30
a. Levels of Hierarchy of Evidence discussed (level 1-7)
Type of Evidence I. Evidence from systematic review or meta-analysis of all relevant random- ized controlled trials (RCTs) or EBP clinical practice guidelines based on systematic reviews or RCTs
II. Evidence from at least one well-designed RCT
III. Evidence from well-designed controlled trials without randomization
IV. Evidence from well-designed case-control and cohort studies
V. Evidence from systematic reviews of descriptive and qualitative studies
VI. Evidence from single descriptive or qualitative studies
VII. Evidence from opinion or authorities and/or reports of expert committees
Dong, J. (2016). Cognitive impairment and structural neuroimaging abnormalities among patients with chronic kidney disease. Kidney and Blood Pressure Research, 41(16), 986-996. doi: 10.1159/000452603
Miyazawa, H., Ookawara, S., Ito, K., Ueda, Y., Yanai, K., Ishii, H., …Morishita, Y. (2018). Association of cerebral oxygenation with estimated glomerular filtration rate and cognitive function in chronic kidney disease patients without dialysis therapy. PLoS ONE, 13(6), e0199366. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com.
Level 4: missing
Valsaraj, B. P., Bhat, S. M., Prabhu, R., & N., D. (2014). A Qualitative Research on the Experience of Haemodialysis in South Karnataka: Lived Experience of Persons undergoing Haemodialysis. Journal Of Krishna Institute Of Medical Sciences (JKIMSU), 3(2), 90-100.
Zala, P. (2017). Experiences of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Their Family Members in an Advanced Practice Nurse-Led Counseling Service. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 44(6), 521-543.
Level 7: missing
5. Clinical decision making…………30
a. Decision supported by evidence discussed
b. Decision answers the PICO question and addresses case study description
B. Reference citations as per APA 6th edition guidelines provided……10%