Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction

Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction For this activity, you will appraise and summarize a quantitative study located for the PICOT and Literature Search assignment and approved by your instructor to determine its potential usefulness to inform nursing practice. As part of this analysis, you need to determine the rigor of the investigation and appraise credibility. You can do this by answering some key questions about the integrity with which they collected and analyzed data and employed techniques to reduce bias. Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction I attached my PICOT question, article and For this activity, Quantitative Appraisal Tool and Synopsis Instructions and Grading Rubric.docx . Can you respond to all of the questions in this file “Quantitative Appraisal Tool and Synopsis Instructions and Grading Rubric.docx” based on article “Effects of nurse work environment on job dissatisfaction, burnout, intention to leave (involved Research Evidence Appraisal Tool ) I attached also sample article “PROPHYLACTIC SACRAL DRESSING FOR PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION IN HIGH-RISK PATIENTS” that my professor attached and “sample completed synopsis” so you can have an idea how to do it. Please follow grading rubrics write it in APA format, and it has to be at least 2.5-3.5 pages . The table with grading rubric article.pdf my_picot_question.docx quantitative_appraisal_tool_and_synopsis_instructions_and_grading_rubric.docx sample_completed_synopsis.docx article_mark_up_f Foreground question: In nurses, how does heavy workload compared with the standard workload, effects intentions to leave nursing professions? Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction Synopsis Draft Byrne et al. (2016) conducted a prospective, nonrandomized, quasi-experimental observational study to evaluate the effects of a prophylactic sacral dressing on incidence of pressure ulcers among high risk patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The study was conducted in three ICUs in an urban tertiary care academic medical center for seven months. The researchers used a convenience sample of 243 adults, aged 18 and older, who were admitted to one of the three ICUs in the facility. All patients admitted during the study were screened for eligibility. Patients were enrolled if they met at least one of the following criteria: surgery longer than 4 hours or more than 1 surgery totaling more than 6 hours, in-hospital cardiac arrest administered vasopressors for longer than 48 hours, or diagnosed with shock, sepsis, or multi-organ dysfunction syndrome. If screened patients did not meet the above criteria, they were included in the study if they met five or more of the following criteria: older than 65; length of stay greater than 5 days; body mass index indicating underweight or morbidly obese; history of pressure ulcers and/or peripheral vascular disease; diagnosed with diabetes, liver failure, spinal cord injury, orthopedic injuries, and/or malnutrition (as separate criteria); assigned a Braden score of 12 or more; hemodynamic instability; or on bedrest, traction, intermittent hemodialysis, mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours, sedation or chemical paralysis for more than 48 hours, nitric oxide ventilation, balloon pump, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (as separate criteria). Patients were excluded from the study if they were incontinent of urine or bowels and not managed with a catheter or fecal management system, had diaphoresis of the sacral area, had existing sacral pressure ulcer, or had weeping edema or anasarca. The authors did not report demographic data; however, the most common conditions for inclusion were sepsis and surgery. Of the study participants, 65% were on bedrest, 41% were 65 or older, and 42% had a length of stay of five days or greater. Only 18% had a Braden score of 12 or more, and only 2.9% had a history of pressure ulcers. The authors did not report or analyze the mix of conditions for the study sample. The sample screening tool was developed from a literature review and validated by three wound and ostomy care nurses employed by the facility. All nurses in the three participated ICUs were trained for participant screening, intervention, and data collection. The same prophylactic dressing used on all study participants, and it was changed every three days per the study protocol. Study subjects were assessed every 12 hours per hospital protocol, with skin assessment then documented on the data collection tool and in the electronic health record. Completed data collection tools collected weekly. Procedures for the proper care of patients who developed skin alterations during study were developed and implemented. The authors used descriptive statistics, incidence rates per 1000 patient days, incidence rate ratios and confidence intervals, and chi-square tests for p-values to analyze the data. The pressure ulcer rate was reduced by 3.4 to 7.6 pressure ulcers per 1000 patient days, with five subjects developing pressure ulcers during the study. Among the three ICUs, the lowest incidence rate ratio was 0.44 [95% CI 0.16 – 1.09], p = 0.08, and the highest incidence rate ratio was 0.54 [95% CI 0.16 – 1.78], p = 0.31. The researchers concluded that use of the dressings reduced pressure ulcer incidence in their ICUs. However, the authors did not explain that their findings were not statistically significant, and the confidence interval showed a possibility of no difference in incidence rates in the population. In addition, there were notable confounding variables, including an organization-wide initiative to reduce pressure ulcers during the study period. Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction For this activity, you will appraise and summarize a quantitative study located for the PICOT and Literature Search assignment and approved by your instructor to determine its potential usefulness to inform nursing practice. As part of this analysis, you need to determine the rigor of the investigation and appraise credibility. You can do this by answering some key questions about the integrity with which they collected and analyzed data and employed techniques to reduce bias. Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction I attached my PICOT question, article and For this activity, Quantitative Appraisal Tool and Synopsis Instructions and Grading Rubric.docx . Can you respond to all of the questions in this file “Quantitative Appraisal Tool and Synopsis Instructions and Grading Rubric.docx” based on article “Effects of nurse work environment on job dissatisfaction, burnout, intention to leave (involved Research Evidence Appraisal Tool ) I attached also sample article “PROPHYLACTIC SACRAL DRESSING FOR PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION IN HIGH-RISK PATIENTS” that my professor attached and “sample completed synopsis” so you can have an idea how to do it. Please follow grading rubrics write it in APA format, and it has to be at least 2.5-3.5 pages . The table with grading rubric article.pdf my_picot_question.docx quantitative_appraisal_tool_and_synopsis_instructions_and_grading_rubric.docx sample_completed_synopsis.docx article_mark_up_f Foreground question: In nurses, how does heavy workload compared with the standard workload, effects intentions to leave nursing professions? Assignment: Effects of Nurse Work Environment on Job Dissatisfaction Synopsis Draft Byrne et al. (2016) conducted a prospective, nonrandomized, quasi-experimental observational study to evaluate the effects of a prophylactic sacral dressing on incidence of pressure ulcers among high risk patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The study was conducted in three ICUs in an urban tertiary care academic medical center for seven months. The researchers used a convenience sample of 243 adults, aged 18 and older, who were admitted to one of the three ICUs in the facility. All patients admitted during the study were screened for eligibility. Patients were enrolled if they met at least one of the following criteria: surgery longer than 4 hours or more than 1 surgery totaling more than 6 hours, in-hospital cardiac arrest administered vasopressors for longer than 48 hours, or diagnosed with shock, sepsis, or multi-organ dysfunction syndrome. If screened patients did not meet the above criteria, they were included in the study if they met five or more of the following criteria: older than 65; length of stay greater than 5 days; body mass index indicating underweight or morbidly obese; history of pressure ulcers and/or peripheral vascular disease; diagnosed with diabetes, liver failure, spinal cord injury, orthopedic injuries, and/or malnutrition (as separate criteria); assigned a Braden score of 12 or more; hemodynamic instability; or on bedrest, traction, intermittent hemodialysis, mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours, sedation or chemical paralysis for more than 48 hours, nitric oxide ventilation, balloon pump, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (as separate criteria). Patients were excluded from the study if they were incontinent of urine or bowels and not managed with a catheter or fecal management system, had diaphoresis of the sacral area, had existing sacral pressure ulcer, or had weeping edema or anasarca. The authors did not report demographic data; however, the most common conditions for inclusion were sepsis and surgery. Of the study participants, 65% were on bedrest, 41% were 65 or older, and 42% had a length of stay of five days or greater. Only 18% had a Braden score of 12 or more, and only 2.9% had a history of pressure ulcers. The authors did not report or analyze the mix of conditions for the study sample. The sample screening tool was developed from a literature review and validated by three wound and ostomy care nurses employed by the facility. All nurses in the three participated ICUs were trained for participant screening, intervention, and data collection. The same prophylactic dressing used on all study participants, and it was changed every three days per the study protocol. Study subjects were assessed every 12 hours per hospital protocol, with skin assessment then documented on the data collection tool and in the electronic health record. Completed data collection tools collected weekly. Procedures for the proper care of patients who developed skin alterations during study were developed and implemented. The authors used descriptive statistics, incidence rates per 1000 patient days, incidence rate ratios and confidence intervals, and chi-square tests for p-values to analyze the data. The pressure ulcer rate was reduced by 3.4 to 7.6 pressure ulcers per 1000 patient days, with five subjects developing pressure ulcers during the study. Among the three ICUs, the lowest incidence rate ratio was 0.44 [95% CI 0.16 – 1.09], p = 0.08, and the highest incidence rate ratio was 0.54 [95% CI 0.16 – 1.78], p = 0.31. The researchers concluded that use of the dressings reduced pressure ulcer incidence in their ICUs. However, the authors did not explain that their findings were not statistically significant, and the confidence interval showed a possibility of no difference in incidence rates in the population. In addition, there were notable confounding variables, including an organization-wide initiative to reduce pressure ulcers during the study period. Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10