NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

• NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources.

Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

• Evidence-Based Approaches to Elderly Pneumonia Treatment

Pneumonia treatment among elderly patients is a significant challenge in the healthcare system because elderly patients often suffer from age-related immune system slumps, giving them the opportunity for various complications (Osman et al., 2021). The evidence-based approach attains the primary objective of improving clinical outcomes and reducing patient risks, subsequently saving hospital resources.

By reviewing and judging the credible contending evidence and references, healthcare providers can make data-driven decisions and use interventions supported by research. This article reveals the significance of evidence-based approaches to be used in the pneumonia treatment of the elders as well as insights on criteria for the trustworthiness of the sources and the relative importance of the evidence within this context.

Quality or Safety Issue: Pneumonia Management in Elderly Patients

The management of pneumonia in the senior population is among the healthcare systems’ most challenging quality and safety of care problems. Continuous exposure to cold weather can aggravate chronic underlining conditions in older people due to their age-related decrease in immune system response (Gumabay et al., 2017). An evidence-based approach to pneumonia handling among this group must be considered.

Rationale for Applying an Evidence-Based Approach:

EBP (Evidence-based practice ) is a way of helping practitioners use the interventions approved by research on a sound, evidence-based basis. Rapid intervention is necessary and proper for elderly pneumonia patients, which will help enhance clinical outcomes, decrease the mortality rate, and prevent related respiratory failure and sepsis (Geyer-Roberts et al., 2023). Doctors may take an evidence-based approach to constructing treatment designs, thus aligning with individual elderly patients’ suffering and raising their recovery rates.

• Evidence-Based Interventions in Elderly Pneumonia Management

Pneumonia management among elderly patients is specific to their conditions. This implies using antibiotics, respiratory support, and infection control measures. Compliance with evidence-based strategies guarantees that these interventions are implemented safely and correctly, reducing the chance of antibiotic-resistant infections, healthcare-associated infections, and treatment-related complications (Ghazala Muteeb et al., 2023).

Literature Support: The study of (Aynalem et al., 2021) reveals that the practical application of evidence-based recommendations for elderly patients’ pneumonia treatment allows for better clinical outcomes and decreased healthcare costs. On the other hand, (Geyer-Roberts et al., 2023) also evidenced that the adoption of evidence-based care bundles addresses bloodstream infections and protects the elderly against ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

Criteria for Determining Credibility of Resources

We need to examine the source for the quality analysis to assess the reliability and validity presented in a journal article or an online source. These need to outline the credibility of their channels in daily practice and research so that medics can make critical decisions.

Authorship and Credentials: It would be advisable to explore who created this resource in terms of their credibility. For journal articles, it has to be about being knowledgeable of authors who are experts in the field and whose credentials are backed up with affiliations with reputable institutions.

The same is true for websites; it is essential to determine which one is comping the articles or the organization behind them. One of the main tasks under the examination criteria is to evaluate a peer-reviewed journal article written by credible experts in pneumonia treatment for the senior population that esteemed academic institutions have published (Kim et al., 2022).

Publication or Source Reputation: One of the significant factors of the assessment is the credibility and the importance of the publisher or source of the resource where it is published or hosted. For journal articles, the most acceptable form of publication is to credit magazines with high-impact factors by undergoing an editorial and peer review process to ascertain the accuracy and quality of the content.

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

In the same way, for websites, the strong points include respected sources like government agencies, professional organizations, and academic institutions while distinguishing them from commercial websites or private blogs, which are more likely to be trusted (Dwivedi et al., 2023). Evaluation of this criterion often includes an assessment of the journal sector, where the article has been published and is reputed in respiratory medicine and geriatrics.

Currency and Timeliness: The scope of applicability of the presented information, in addition to the relevance and timeliness of the material, is all information that needs to be critically evaluated. In medicine, utilizing the most recent research and protocols is imperative as the fields are evolving so rapidly. Journal articles, to various extents, are a source of the latest knowledge, as recent publication dates will ensure that information is updated (Bohr & Memarzadeh, 2020). For websites, exhibiting the ongoing efforts to keep content updated and detailed with timestamps indicates the continuous attempt to make information available. Putting up this criterion requires resource selection having up-to-date publication dates and the latest updates to guarantee information accuracy in light of the latest research-based practices and suggestions in the posology of pneumonia for elderly patients (Candel et al., 2023). This approach aligns with the standards set in NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources, ensuring that only the most current and reliable resources are used.

• Evaluating Authority and Credibility of Evidence in Pneumonia Management

Concerning senior pneumonia management, assessing the authority and utility of research and data used to derive conclusions and recommendations for improving clinical outcomes is imperative. Peer-reviewed journal articles are the source of the top level in evidence-based practice because of their strict review process in terms of the authors and the review experts. The publication of articles in journals with high impact, like Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine or the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, will be of significant benefit because they provide high-quality information that can help in the correct diagnosis and general management of elderly patients with pneumonia (Yoshimatsu et al., 2023).

While one of the crucial aspects in evaluating the impact of evidence, systematic reviews and meta-analyses also contribute to establishing the credibility of the evidence. These meta-analyses draw from several primary studies, and in turn, they consolidate knowledge about the most recent evidence. Such examples as the Cochrane Respiratory Care Bulgaria Review, the systematic review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews evaluating respiratory care bundles in pneumonia management, offer clear evidence concerning the effectiveness of various interventions in elderly patients (Smith et al., 2020).

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources.

Authoritative societies like the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the Agency of Infectious Diseases (IDSA) regularly publish evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for professionals (Cole, 2020). The guidelines are synthesized by experts using a sound process that also considers the latest research evidence. Adhering to suggestions came from build-trustworthy organizations underscores that clinical judgments are the most trustworthy, as highlighted in NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources, due to the careful investigation and agreement of shared knowledge among experts working in the field.

Identifying the Most Useful Evidence or Resource

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are among the various available evidence and resources and the most valuable tools for suggesting clinical practice guidelines for pneumonia in elderly patients. The reviews of these studies present a summary of the existing evidence, letting healthcare professionals make inferences and guidelines based on results systematically obtained from numerous primary studies (Tikkinen & Guyatt, 2021). Such reviews and meta-analyses through pooling the data of multiple trials are foundations of a high level of evidence characterized as relevant, most credible, and applicable to clinical practice.

Importance of Incorporating Credible Evidence into Evidence-Based Practice

Research supports or exhibits evidence-based practices (EBP) in effectively heading quality care, patient safety, and other healthcare issues. Evidence-based practice is a process that incorporates and ultimately blends valid research findings with the professional expertise and shared experiences of patients, making clinical decision-making responsible and effective and resulting in improved outcomes for patients (Kumah et al., 2022). A healthcare provider should incorporate respectable evidence based on frictionless and trustworthy resources to make clinical decisions in line with their proficiency.

Enhancing Quality and Safety

Including credible data-driven evidence in an EBP model, which results in better quality and safety during the healthcare delivery process, is one of the main advantages. To illustrate, in deciding on how to handle hypothetical pneumonia that affects the aged population, the treatment regimes developed on an evidence-based practice by societies.

The American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America provide direction based on the use of study reviews and consensus among the experts to develop the optimal treatment plan (Martin-Loeches et al., 2023). The application of these policies would guarantee that patients be given standardized, evidence-based care, which would eventually minimize the risk of adverse outcomes such as complications and drug interactions.

Optimizing Patient Outcomes

Through the EBP model, one can highly enhance the health providers’ ability to improve patient outcomes by targeting the established interventions that have proven effective through deliberate research. They may practice systematic reviews and meta-analyses determining the efficiency of respiratory care bundles in implementing treatment for pneumonia that is suited for elderly patients to reduce the number of them who die, shortening the time in the hospitals (Papazian et al., 2020).

These evidence-based approaches can be embedded into an EBP model, giving providers the scope to design plans to suit individual patients and, on the other hand, to ensure that standards and consistency are maintained within the plan.

Conclusion

By integrating trustworthy evidence into clinical decision-making mechanisms, healthcare professionals are empowered to realize the best patient outcomes, promote safety, and facilitate efficient resource utilization.

Criterion, credentials of the author, reputation of the publication, and timelines are all essential for assessing the reliability of resources. By relying on sound evidence from peer-reviewed journals, systematic reviews, and guidelines, healthcare professionals can confidently administer quality, evidence-based treatment to elderly patients with pneumonia, resulting in better clinical outcomes and patient security. Read more about our sample NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 4 for complete information about this class.

References

Always, S. A., Alghamdi, S. S., Alsuhebany, N., Alqahtani, T., Abdulrahman Alshaya, Almohareb, S. N., Atheer Aldairem, Alrashed, M., Khalid Bin Saleh, Badreldin, H. A., Yami, A., Shmeylan Al Harbi, & Albekairy, A. M. (2023). Revolutionizing healthcare: The role of artificial intelligence in clinical practice. BMC Medical Education, 23(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04698-z

Aynalem, Z. B., Yazew, K. G., & Gebrie, M. H. (2021). Evidence-based practice utilization and associated factors among Amhara region referral hospitals, Ethiopia nurses. PLOS ONE, 16(3).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248834

Bohr, A., & Memarzadeh, K. (2020). The rise of artificial intelligence in healthcare applications. Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare, 1(1), 25–60. NCBI.

Candel, F. J., Salavert, M., Basaras, M., Borges, M., Cantón, R., Cercenado, E., Cilloniz, C., Estella, Á., García-Lechuz, J. M., Garnacho Montero, J., Gordo, F., Julián-Jiménez, A., Martín-Sánchez, F. J., Maseda, E., Matesanz, M., Menéndez, R., Mirón-Rubio, M., Ortiz de Lejarazu, R., Polverino, E., & Retamar-Gentil, P. (2023). Ten issues for updating in community-acquired pneumonia: An expert review. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(21), 64–68.

https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12216864

Cole, B. (2020). Essential components of a public health tuberculosis prevention, control, and elimination program: Recommendations of the advisory council for eliminating tuberculosis and the National Tuberculosis Controllers Association. MMWR. Recommendations and Reports, 69(7).

https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr6907a1

Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., & Carter, L. (2023). “So what if chatbot wrote it?” multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges, and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice, and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71(0268-4012).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

Geyer-Roberts, E., Lacatusu, D. A., Kester, J., Foster-Moumoutjis, G., & Sidiqi, M. (2023). Preventative management of sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome in the geriatric population. Cureus, 4(2).

https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.34680

Ghazala Muteeb, Rehman, T., Shahwan, M., & Aatif, M. (2023). Origin of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance, and their impacts on drug development: A narrative review. Pharmaceuticals, 16(11), 1615–1615.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16111615

Gumabay, E. M. S., Ramirez, R. C., Dimaya, J. M. M., & Beltran, M. M. (2017). Adversity of prolonged extreme cold exposure among adult clients diagnosed with coronary artery diseases: A primer for recommending community health nursing intervention. Nursing Open, 5(1), 62–69.

https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.111

Kim, B.-G., Kang, M., Lim, J., Lee, J., Kang, D., Kim, M., Kim, J., Park, H., Min, K. H., Cho, J., & Jeon, K. (2022). Comprehensive risk assessment for hospital-acquired pneumonia: Sociodemographic, clinical, and hospital environmental factors associated with the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia. BMC Pulmonary Medicine, 22(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-021-01816-9

Kumah, E. A., McSherry, R., Bettany‐Saltikov, J., Schaik, P., Hamilton, S., Hogg, J., & Whittaker, V. (2022). Evidence‐informed practice versus evidence‐based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward applying evidence into practice: A comprehensive systematic review of UG student. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18(2).

https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1233

Martin-Loeches, I., Torres, A., Nagavci, B., Aliberti, S., Antonelli, M., Bassetti, M., Bos, L., Chalmers, J., Derde, L., de Waele, J., Garnacho-Montero, J., Kollef, M., Luna, C., Menendez, R., Niederman, M., Ponomarev, D., Restrepo, M., Rigau, D., Schultz, M., & Weiss, E. (2023). ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for managing severe community-acquired pneumonia. Intensive Care Medicine, 6(2).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-023-07033-8

Osman, M., Manosuthi, W., Kaewkungwal, J., Silachamroon, U., Mansanguan, C., Kamolratanakul, S., & Pitisuttithum, P. (2021). Etiology, clinical course, and pneumonia outcomes in the elderly: A retrospective and prospective cohort study in Thailand. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 104(6), 2009–2016.

https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-1393

Papazian, L., Klompas, M., & Luyt, C.-E. (2020). Ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: A narrative review. Intensive Care Medicine, 46(5), 888–906.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-05980-0

Smith, V., Devane, D., Nichol, A., & Roche, D. (2020). Care bundles for improving outcomes in patients with COVID-19 or related conditions in intensive care – a rapid scoping review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 3(6).

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013819

Tikkinen, K. A. O., & Guyatt, G. H. (2021). Understanding research results, evidence summaries, and their applicability—not critical appraisal—are core skills in the medical curriculum. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 26(5), 231–233.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111542

Yoshimatsu, Y., Yoichi Ohtake, Mamiko Ukai, Taiju Miyagami, Morikawa, T., Shimamura, Y., Kataoka, Y., & Hashimoto, T. (2023). “Diagnose, treat, and SUPPORT.” Clinical competencies in managing older adults with aspiration pneumonia: A scoping review. European Geriatric Medicine, 4(9).

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-023-00898-4