HCA 459 Entire Course Discussion
HCA 459 Entire Course Discussion HCA 459 Entire Course Discussion HCA 459 Week 1 DQ 1 Organizational Survival…
Published: June 8, 2026
Week: 2 | Assignment Type: Course Project – Part 1 | Length: 3–4 pages (excluding title and reference pages) | Format: APA 7th Edition
Evidence-based practice involves a great deal more than simply reading nursing periodicals on a regular basis. Nurses can take a more proactive approach to evidence-based practice by identifying authentic problems and concerns, and then using that to guide their inquiries into current research. In this way, nurses can connect the results of relevant research studies to their nursing practice.
For the Course Project, you identify and apply relevant research to a specific nursing topic or problem. You begin by formulating an answerable question that is relevant to nursing and evidence-based practice. In later weeks of the course, you continue the Course Project by conducting a literature review and then determining how the evidence from the literature can be applied to nursing practice.
One of the most challenging aspects of EBP is to actually identify the answerable question.
—Karen Sue Davies
Formulating a question that targets the goal of your research is a challenging but essential task. The question plays a crucial role in all other aspects of the research, including the determination of the research design and theoretical perspective to be applied, which data will be collected, and which tools will be used for analysis. It is therefore essential to take the time to ensure that the research question addresses what you actually want to study. Doing so will increase your likelihood of obtaining meaningful results.
Write a 3- to 4-page paper that includes the following:
Formatting expectations (School of Nursing): Include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. All papers must use APA 7th edition formatting (double-spaced, 1″ margins, Times New Roman 12 pt or equivalent). Submit your paper to Grammarly and SafeAssign through the Walden Writing Center and revise as necessary.
| Criteria | Excellent (90–100%) | Proficient (80–89%) | Needs Improvement (0–79%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Area of Interest & Problem Identification (25 pts) | Clear, specific summary of area of interest; problem is authentic, well-defined, and strongly linked to nursing practice; significance is compelling and evidence-informed. | Area of interest and problem are described but lack specificity or strong connection to practice; significance is stated but not well-supported. | Area of interest or problem is vague, missing, or not relevant to nursing; significance is absent or unclear. |
| Five Questions & Feasibility Analysis (25 pts) | Five distinct, researchable questions provided; feasibility analysis is thorough, using course criteria (significance, feasibility, interest) with clear rationale for selection. | Five questions provided but some are overlapping or not fully researchable; feasibility analysis is present but superficial. | Fewer than five questions; feasibility analysis missing or does not use course criteria. |
| PICOT Question & Variables (25 pts) | PICOT question is clearly answerable and correctly structured; each variable (P, I, C, O, T) is explicitly identified and justified with reference to the problem. | PICOT question is present but partially incomplete or weakly answerable; variables are identified but justification is limited. | PICOT question is missing, not answerable, or incorrectly structured; variables are not clearly identified. |
| Keywords & Rationale (15 pts) | At least 10 relevant keywords provided; rationale demonstrates understanding of search strategy, database compatibility, and Boolean logic. | 10 keywords provided but rationale is generic or lacks search strategy detail. | Fewer than 10 keywords; rationale missing or incoherent. |
| APA Style, Writing Quality, Structure (10 pts) | Flawless APA 7th edition formatting; title page, introduction, summary, and references present; writing is clear, concise, and free of errors. | Minor APA or writing errors; most required elements present. | Major APA or writing errors; required elements missing or incomplete. |
In my medical–surgical unit, I have observed a high rate of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) among older adults with limited mobility, which leads to extended lengths of stay and increased morbidity. The problem I selected is the insufficient use of standardized pressure injury prevention protocols in this population, and this gap is significant because HAPIs are largely preventable and represent a key quality and safety metric for nursing practice. I generated five questions, including “Does repositioning every 2 hours reduce HAPI rates?” and “Do pressure-redistributing mattresses lower injury incidence compared to standard mattresses?”; I analyzed these for feasibility by considering data availability, time constraints, and relevance to our unit’s resources, ultimately selecting the mattress comparison question because our hospital already stocks both mattress types and outcome data are routinely collected. My preliminary PICOT question is: In hospitalized adults aged 65 and older with limited mobility (P), does use of a pressure-redistributing mattress (I) compared to a standard hospital mattress (C) reduce the incidence of stage 2 or higher pressure injuries (O) over a 12-week period (T)? The PICOT variables are: Population = adults ≥65 with limited mobility; Intervention = pressure-redistributing mattress; Comparison = standard mattress; Outcome = incidence of stage 2+ pressure injuries; Time = 12 weeks. Ten keywords for literature search include: pressure injury, hospital-acquired pressure injury, mattress, pressure-redistributing mattress, older adults, elderly, mobility impairment, incidence, prevention, and protocol; I selected these terms because they map directly to PICOT variables and align with MeSH headings used in CINAHL and PubMed, which increases search sensitivity and specificity according to the EBP question frameworks reviewed in Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2023) Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt (2023).
The keyword list intentionally includes both lay and technical terms (e.g., “elderly” and “older adults”) to capture broader search results while maintaining precision through Boolean operators such as “AND” and “OR.” For example, combining “pressure injury” AND “mattress” AND “older adults” isolates studies that directly address the intervention and population, while adding “incidence” OR “prevention” focuses on outcome measures. This approach mirrors the framework recommended for constructing EBP questions and aligns search strategies with the PICOT structure to reduce irrelevant hits and improve yield of systematic and integrative reviews.
A frequent student misconception is that the “T” (time) component is optional or irrelevant for all clinical questions; however, time is critical when the outcome is incidence or rate over a defined period, as in pressure injury development. Another misconception is that PICO without T is sufficient for all EBP questions, but intervention effectiveness questions that involve monitoring outcomes over time require a time frame to ensure the study design can capture the outcome reliably. Clarifying these points helps students construct questions that are truly answerable and that guide subsequent literature review and study design choices.
Write a 3–4 page APA 7 paper identifying a nursing problem, 5 feasibility-analyzed questions, a PICOT question with variables, and 10 search keywords for NUSR6052 EBP Course Project Part 1.
Compose a 3–4 page NUSR6052 Course Project Part 1 paper: summarize your nursing problem, analyze 5 questions for feasibility, formulate a PICOT question, and list 10 literature search keywords with rationale.
NUSR6052 EBP Course Project Part 1: Identify a researchable nursing problem, generate 5 questions, create a PICOT question with variables, and provide 10 keywords for literature search in APA 7 format.
(Week 4 — Course Project Part 2: Literature Review)
Week: 4 | Assignment Type: Course Project – Part 2 | Length: 3–4 pages (excluding title and reference pages) | Format: APA 7th Edition
This is a continuation of the Course Project presented in Week 2. Before you begin, review the Course Project Overview document located in the Week 2 Resources area. The literature review is a critical piece in the research process because it helps a researcher determine what is currently known about a topic and identify gaps or further questions. Conducting a thorough literature review can be a time-consuming process, but the effort helps establish the foundation for everything that will follow. For this part of your Course Project, you will conduct a brief literature review to find information on the question you developed in Week 2. This will provide you with experience in searching databases and identifying applicable resources.
Write a 3- to 4-page literature review that includes the following:
The post Project Part 1: Identify a researchable nursing problem appeared first on EssayBishops.
Chat with a verified tutor and get a clear, original answer.
Ask your own question and get a verified answer from a tutor or top student.
Ask a Question