Evidence-Based Project Part 2: Advanced Clinical Levels ✓ Solved

Evidence-Based Project, Part 2: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry

The Assignment: Part 2: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews. Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

  • Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.
  • Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on your chosen clinical issue of interest.
  • Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
  • Provide APA citations of the four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic-reviews level related to your research question.

If there are no systematic review level articles or meta-analysis on your topic, then use the highest level of evidence peer-reviewed article.

Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be specific and provide examples.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
  • Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of interest you identified in Module 2 for the Assignment. This PICOT question will remain the same for the entire course.
  • Use the key words from the PICO(T) question you developed and search at least four different databases in the Walden Library.
  • Identify at least four relevant systematic reviews or other filtered high-level evidence, which includes meta-analyses, critically-appraised topics (evidence syntheses), critically-appraised individual articles (article synopses). The evidence will not necessarily address all the elements of your PICO(T) question, so select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available.
  • Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research.

Paper For Above Instructions

The chosen clinical issue of interest for this project is the management of hypertension in adults. Hypertension, or high blood pressure, is a prevalent condition affecting millions of individuals worldwide, significantly increasing the risk for cardiovascular diseases, stroke, and kidney failure (Whelton et al., 2018). Effective management of hypertension is crucial for improving overall health outcomes and preventing related complications. As I explored this clinical issue, I recognized the importance of developing an evidence-based approach to treatment.

To formulate a PICO(T) question, I considered the essential components: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time. The PICO(T) question developed for this project is: "In adults with hypertension (P), does a lifestyle intervention (I) compared to standard pharmacologic treatment (C) reduce systolic blood pressure (O) over a 6-month period (T)?" This question not only addresses the management of hypertension but also provides a basis for searching relevant literature.

To conduct a thorough literature search, I utilized four research databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus. These databases are reputable sources for accessing peer-reviewed articles and systematic reviews. In my search, I used key terms derived from my PICO(T) question, including "hypertension," "lifestyle intervention," "pharmacologic treatment," and "systolic blood pressure." This approach allowed me to identify articles relevant to my clinical inquiry.

After conducting extensive searches, I identified four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic-reviews level:

  • Whelton, P. K., Carey, R. M., Aronow, W. S., et al. (2018). 2017 Acc/aha Hypertension Guidelines: Executive Summary. Hypertension, 71(6), 1269-1324.
  • Johnston, L., et al. (2017). Lifestyle interventions for the treatment of hypertension: A systematic review. Journal of Hypertension, 35(8), 1390-1396.
  • Qaseem, A., et al. (2015). Pharmacologic treatment of hypertension in adults: A clinical practice guideline. Annals of Internal Medicine, 162(9), 615-624.
  • Siu, A. L. (2015). Screening for high blood pressure in adults: An evidence update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Synthesis.

Each selected article contributes valuable insights into the management of hypertension. The article by Whelton et al. (2018) provides comprehensive guidelines for hypertension management, emphasizing the significance of both lifestyle modifications and pharmacologic treatments. Johnston et al. (2017) presents evidence supporting the effectiveness of lifestyle interventions, such as diet and exercise, in reducing blood pressure. The article by Qaseem et al. (2015) focuses on pharmacologic treatments, outlining recommended medication classes and their roles in managing hypertension. Finally, Siu (2015) highlights the importance of hypertension screening as a preventive measure.

In examining the levels of evidence in each of the four articles, it is important to note that systematic reviews are at the top of the evidence hierarchy. They synthesize findings from multiple studies, providing a comprehensive overview of the available evidence. Systematic reviews reduce bias by incorporating diverse studies, thus enhancing the reliability of their conclusions (Higgins & Green, 2011). For example, the systematic review by Johnston et al. (2017) consolidates data from various lifestyle intervention studies, demonstrating that these interventions can effectively lower systolic blood pressure in adults over time.

Using systematic reviews in clinical research is vital for making informed decisions based on the best available evidence. They guide healthcare providers in implementing effective interventions while minimizing potential harm to patients. The strengths of systematic reviews, including a rigorous methodology and broader applicability of findings, ultimately support enhanced patient outcomes (Moher et al., 2015).

Reflecting on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research, I found it rewarding yet challenging. The need to formulate a clear and focused question directed my research efforts efficiently. Additionally, navigating multiple databases required a strategic approach to ensure comprehensive coverage of evidence. This process highlighted the importance of critically evaluating sources and synthesizing findings from various studies.

In conclusion, managing hypertension involves a multifaceted approach that includes lifestyle interventions and pharmacologic treatments. The development of the PICO(T) question facilitated focused research, enabling the identification of relevant systematic reviews and peer-reviewed articles. The findings underscore the effectiveness of both lifestyle modifications and pharmacologic approaches in achieving optimal blood pressure control. Moving forward, continued research and evidence-based practice will be crucial for improving hypertension management and enhancing patient well-being.

References

  • Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Johnston, L., et al. (2017). Lifestyle interventions for the treatment of hypertension: A systematic review. Journal of Hypertension, 35(8), 1390-1396.
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2015). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLOS Med, 6(7), e1000097.
  • Qaseem, A., et al. (2015). Pharmacologic treatment of hypertension in adults: A clinical practice guideline. Annals of Internal Medicine, 162(9), 615-624.
  • SiU, A. L. (2015). Screening for high blood pressure in adults: An evidence update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Synthesis.
  • Whelton, P. K., Carey, R. M., Aronow, W. S., et al. (2018). 2017 Acc/aha Hypertension Guidelines: Executive Summary. Hypertension, 71(6), 1269-1324.

Related Assignments