Required Readings: Melnyk B M, Fineout-Overholt E, 20 647996

Required Readingsmelnyk B M Fineout Overholt E 2018evidence

Required Readingsmelnyk B M Fineout Overholt E 2018evidence

Required Readings Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer. Chapter 7, “Patient Concerns, Choices and Clinical Judgement in Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 219–232)

Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10186

Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. doi:10.1097/CCM

Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. doi:10.1097/NND

Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. doi:10.1111/j..2011.00730.x

The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. (2019). Patient decision aids. Retrieved from

Paper For Above instruction

Evidence-based practice (EBP) in nursing and healthcare represents a systematic approach to integrating the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences to deliver optimal care. The integration of shared decision making (SDM) into EBP is particularly significant as it emphasizes patients' active participation in their health decisions, fostering patient-centered care and improving health outcomes. The core idea behind these concepts revolves around respecting patient concerns and values, ensuring clinical judgements are aligned with individual preferences, and utilizing decision aids to facilitate informed choices.

In Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt’s seminal work, EBP is depicted as a multifaceted process that encompasses clinical expertise, best research evidence, and patient preferences. Particularly, Chapter 7 underscores the importance of eliciting patient concerns and integrating these into decision-making processes to enhance clinical judgment (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2018). This approach recognizes that evidence alone is insufficient unless contextualized within the patient’s specific values and experiences. The authors advocate for engaging patients as active partners, which aligns seamlessly with the principles of shared decision making (SDM).

Hoffman, Montori, and Del Mar (2014) further elucidate the connection between evidence-based medicine and SDM, emphasizing that shared decision making helps bridge the gap between clinical evidence and individual patient values. They argue that SDM facilitates informed choices by providing patients with balanced, evidence-based information about potential benefits and risks, thus empowering them and fostering greater satisfaction. Their work highlights that SDM is not merely an ethical principle but a practical approach to improving health outcomes by aligning treatments with patient preferences.

Kon et al. (2016) provide a comprehensive policy statement on SDM in intensive care units (ICUs), illustrating its importance in high-stakes environments where decisions are complex and urgent. Their guidelines recommend implementing structured SDM processes that incorporate patient values, family input, and clinician expertise. They emphasize that decision aids, which distill complex information into understandable formats, are crucial tools to facilitate SDM in critical care. This underscores that decision aids are central to translating evidence into patient-centric choices, especially in settings with high emotional and informational complexity.

Opperman et al. (2016) focus on measuring the return on investment (ROI) for professional development activities aimed at enhancing shared decision-making skills among healthcare professionals. They argue that investing in SDM training leads to improved patient outcomes, increased patient satisfaction, and reduced healthcare costs by avoiding unnecessary procedures. Their findings suggest that SDM and related educational initiatives are not only ethically desirable but also economically beneficial, reinforcing the need for healthcare organizations to adopt and invest in SDM frameworks.

Schroy, Mylvaganam, and Davidson (2014) explore provider perspectives on colorectal cancer screening decision aids. Their study reveals that such tools are highly valued by providers for facilitating shared decision making, as they help clarify risks, benefits, and patients' values regarding screening options. The utility of decision aids in promoting patient engagement and ensuring that choices reflect patient preferences aligns with the broader goals of EBP, indicating that effective communication tools significantly enhance shared decision making processes.

The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (2019) further emphasizes that patient decision aids are evidence-based tools designed to help individuals make specific and deliberated choices among healthcare options. These aids typically include facts about options, probabilities of outcomes, and tailored values clarification exercises. Implementing decision aids in clinical practice ensures that patients are well-informed and that their preferences are accurately incorporated into decision-making processes. These tools are essential constituents of modern, patient-centered healthcare, embodying the principles of both EBP and SDM.

In conclusion, integrating shared decision making into evidence-based clinical practice elevates the quality and personalization of healthcare delivery. By actively involving patients in decision processes, clinicians can foster better understanding, satisfaction, and adherence to chosen treatments. The literature consistently supports that decision aids and effective communication strategies are instrumental in this integration. Ultimately, the synergy of EBP and SDM paves the way for more ethical, effective, and patient-centered healthcare systems.

References

  • Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1295–1296. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.10186
  • Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM
  • Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
  • Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. https://doi.org/10.1097/NND
  • Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j..2011.00730.x
  • The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. (2019). Patient decision aids. Retrieved from https://academics.ohri.ca/programs/clinical\_guidelines/DecisionAids.html

Related Assignments