A. Discuss the impact of a clinical practice problem on the patient(s) and the organization it affects.
1. Identify the following PICO components of the clinical practice problem:
• patient/population/problem (P)
• intervention (I)
• comparison (C)
• outcome (O)
2. Develop an evidence-based practice (EBP) question based on the clinical practice problem discussed in part A and the PICO components identified in part A1.
Note: Refer to “Appendix B: Question Development Tool” for information on the creation of an EBP question.
B. Select a research-based article that answers your EBP question from part A2 to conduct an evidence appraisal.
1. Discuss the background or introduction (i.e., the purpose) of the research article.
2. Describe the research methodology.
3. Identify the level of evidence using the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice (JHNEBP) model.
Note: The article you select should not be more than five years old.
Note: Refer to “Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” for information on how to level a research-based article.
4. Summarize how the researcher analyzed the data in the article.
5. Summarize the ethical consideration(s) of the research-based article. If none are present, explain why.
6. Identify the quality rating of the research-based article according to the JHNEBP model.
Note: Refer to “Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” for information on how to establish the quality rating.
7. Analyze the results or conclusions of the research-based article and explain how the article helps answer your EBP question.
C. Select a non-research article from a peer-reviewed journal that helps to answer your EBP question from part A2 to conduct an evidence appraisal.
1. Discuss the background or introduction (i.e., the purpose) of the non-research article.
2. Describe the type of evidence (e.g., case study, quality improvement project, clinical practice guideline).
3. Identify the level of evidence using the JHNEBP model.
Evidence-based practice (EBP) impact has echoed across nursing practice, education, and science. The call for evidence-based quality improvement and healthcare transformation underscores the need for redesigning care that is effective, safe, and efficient. In line with multiple direction-setting recommendations from national experts, nurses have responded to launch initiatives that maximize the valuable contributions that nurses have made, can make, and will make, to fully deliver on the promise of EBP. Such initiatives include practice adoption; education and curricular realignment; model and theory development; scientific engagement in the new fields of research; and development of a national research network to study improvement.
Corporation v Steel & Morris, linked with the Steel & Morris v United Kingdom, the defendant published a six-page brochure “What’s wrong with McDonald’s?” Based on this brochure. McDonald’s has filed a lawsuit against slander. The defendant sought legal aid but was denied legal aid because there was no legal aid available for defamation. The defendant should have represented himself, and McDonald’s was the principal lawyer, junior attorney and at least one lawyer in the whole case. The case was quite difficult, both in substance and in law as it lasted 313 days and included 40,000 pages of documentary evidence and 130 witnesses who provided oral evidence. The European Court of Human Rights believes that the refusal to provide legal aid makes it impossible for the defendant to effectively represent his/her case in the court doesn’t provide access to equal justice, which is unacceptable to McDonald. Therefore, it was stated that Article 6 has been violated.
In civil matters, contrary to the legal aid, criminal protection provided which is state-funded, would continue to be driven by demand. Without a budget, all cases that respect the rights of justice must comply with the rules and an economic review will also receive funds. It is stated by the government that private and public lawyers’ mixed system would provide taxpayers with the best economic benefits in criminal defence work. As a result, clients who are sent to private lawyers and public defenders can receive funds for criminal defence.
In July 2005, Lord Falconer, Minister of Constitutional Affairs, appointed Lord Carter Coles to conduct the largest independent review reforms about obtaining legal aid for 50 years. The task was to achieve good value for money, control excessive spending on legal aid and ensure the justice of civil and criminal justice systems. Since January 2008, the service lawyers have been paid a fixed fee and there has been a change in service lawyers at police stations, with a limited selection of criminal protection services, the choice of customer representatives have been limited. Any individual who has been arrested and detained for the non-criminal offence can be paid privately, choose his/her lawyer and must be satisfied with the telephone consultation call centre.
Since the enforcement of the Legal Services Act 2007, the Carter report suggested