NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention Student Name  Capella University  NURS-FPX 8035 Foundations of Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing

  Restating the PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention The PICOT query is as follows: In the context of hospitalized patients (P), does the implementation of incident reporting (I), as opposed to the absence of such reporting (C), result in an improvement in patient safety (O) over a period of six months (T)? The components of PICOT include P (Patients admitted to the hospital), I (Incident reporting), C (No reporting), O (Enhanced patient safety), and T (Six months). This investigation is based on the study conducted by Petschnig and Haslinger-Baumann (2017), which explored the effectiveness of incident reporting systems in hospitals and their deployment to enhance patient safety. The assessment of the change process’s effectiveness within the fifth and final stage of an evidence-based practice (EBP) framework is central to this inquiry.  The intended outcome is the prevention of patient, nurse, and staff injuries or falls within the hospital setting, along with the absence of errors in medicine or care, and no reported incidents, including allergies. Initial data indicates three incidents of patient falls and two reports of allergies due to medication errors in 2018, while 2019 recorded four patient falls, one nurse injury (broken arm), and one staff member requiring treatment (incident report).  Following the implementation of an incident reporting system, 2020 reported no patient falls but one incident of medication error-induced allergy. Post-implementation, there was a significant 100% reduction in patient fall incidents and a 50% decrease in allergy reactions compared to 2019. Additionally, there were no staff or nurse treatments in 2020, suggesting the intervention’s efficacy in the first year of implementation (Petschnig & Haslinger-Baumann, 2017).  Continuation of the Intervention Plan The intervention is scheduled to span three months. To comprehensively assess the intervention using EBP principles, a set of complementary metrics must be identified, and data collection should occur continuously. Two critical metrics are the number of incidents per week and the response time for each incident, facilitating the calculation of the average response time. Thorough planning of these metrics is vital to ensure comprehensive coverage of all aspects of the intervention. Data collection parameters encompass incident category, personnel response time, incident duration, personnel recording the incident, patient age and gender, and the reason for initial admission. Regular weekly data collection and reporting on a weekly, monthly, or annual basis will aid in identifying short-term and long-term cyclical trends, guiding appropriate decisions and corrective actions.  Sustaining the Intervention Strategy For any new intervention necessitating a process change, complete support from management is crucial. Therefore, the primary strategy for sustaining evidence-based practice (EBP) is for management to actively support staff (Carlfjord et al., 2018). Management should conduct strategy sessions, engaging with staff, nurses, and physicians through regular meetings. Incorporating their perspectives and opinions as part of the improvement feedback process will contribute to the sustained success of the intervention.  References Carlfjord, S., Ohrn, A., & Gunnarsson, A. (2018). Experiences from ten years of incident reporting in health care: A qualitative study among department managers and coordinators. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1-9.  NURS FPX 8035 Assessment 3 Restate The PICOT Question and Outcomes of the Intervention Petschnig, W., & Haslinger-Baumann, E. (2017). Critical Incident Reporting System (CIRS): A fundamental component of risk management in health care systems to enhance patient safety. Safety in Health, 3(1), 1-16.  Appendix I incorporated feedback received from previous reports. For example, APA recommends writing out numbers below ten as words, so I expressed all single-digit numbers as words. The journal title is capitalized, and “et al.” is used to cite a paper with three authors. My strength lies in gathering and analyzing data for improvement, while my weakness in planning has been addressed based on received feedback.