Respond To The Post Below Using One Or More Of The

Respond To The Post That Is Bellow Using One Or More Of The Following

Respond to the Post that is below using one or more of the following approaches: Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives. Validate an idea with your own experience and additional sources. Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings, or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Initial Discussion Post

Nursing is a field filled with numerous policies and procedures. To understand these policies and procedures, the practice of research and knowledge acquisition is essential. The method of incorporating proper research into daily practice is called evidence-based practice (Polit & Beck, 2017). The goal of using evidence-based practice is to move away from traditions and ritual by incorporating tested research evidence that supports clinical practices (Polit & Beck, 2017).

Summary of Article Search

Based on the evidence hierarchy by Polit & Beck (2017), and the levels of evidence presented in class, I was able to evaluate research articles (Walden University, 2018). When looking for specific research for my topic, I searched for the highest level of evidence. There are three types of research: primary, synthesized or secondary, and others such as expert opinions or practice questions (Polit & Beck, 2017).

My PICOT question is: In patients with acute pain in the emergency department, what is the effect of Ketamine use for the reduction of pain compared to opioid medications during their ED visit? To begin the search, I used the keywords Ketamine, analgesia, sedation, and emergency medicine. Using these words, I was able to find 408 results. I further limited my search to ten years, which yielded 297 results. Finally, I used systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for my final search, narrowing the articles to 111.

Upon examination of the articles, I found the articles based on systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and RCTs provided detailed research including abstracts, methods of trials, results, discussion, limitations, and conclusions. Each of these sections specifies the purpose of the study in detail. Using this framework for literature review ensures relevant research is used to answer evidence-seeking questions. Davies (2011) comments, “detailed knowledge of the frameworks enables the searcher to refine strategies to suit each particular situation rather than trying to fit a search situation to a framework” (p. 79).

By using a timeframe such as the past ten years, it is easier to see the relevance of the information to clinical practice today. An active literature search will yield the most appropriate information for the question being posed.

References

• Davies, K. S. (2011). Formulating the evidence-based practice question: a review of the frameworks. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 75-80.
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
• Walden University Library. (2018). Levels of evidence. Retrieved from

Paper For Above instruction

Engaging with evidence-based practice (EBP) is fundamental to advancing nursing care and ensuring that clinical decisions are rooted in the most current and reliable evidence. The process of integrating research into practice not only enhances patient outcomes but also promotes professional development among nurses. The post in question emphasizes the critical role of systematic searches and the importance of hierarchy levels in evidence to inform clinical decisions effectively, which aligns with best practices in nursing research.

Insights from the post reveal a structured approach to literature review, taking advantage of evidence hierarchies by Polit & Beck (2017). This systematic method ensures that nurses and researchers prioritize high-quality evidence such as systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which are regarded as the gold standard for establishing clinical efficacy. I concur with this approach, as my own experience confirms that evaluating sources based on their evidence level enhances the reliability of implementation in clinical settings, leading to improved patient care outcomes.

Furthermore, the post highlights the importance of defining clear search parameters, including keywords, timeframe, and evidence quality filters, which streamlines the literature review process. This methodology not only ensures relevance but also maintains focus on recent advances, which is crucial given the dynamic nature of medical research. As Davies (2011) notes, understanding and utilizing appropriate frameworks for formulation of PICOT questions enables practitioners to tailor literature searches effectively, which underscores the importance of systematic planning in evidence-based inquiry.

Adding to this perspective, I suggest integrating the use of specialized databases such as Cochrane Library and PubMed to enhance the quality and scope of evidence searches. These resources often contain curated systematic reviews and controlled trials, which can further refine search results to the most pertinent evidence. Additionally, the use of Boolean operators and advanced search filters can optimize searches, saving valuable time while maintaining comprehensiveness.

In sum, the meticulous approach highlighted in the post exemplifies best practices in research efficiency and evidence hierarchy utilization. As nursing continues to evolve, integrating such rigorous strategies will remain essential for fostering clinical innovations that are both evidence-based and patient-centered. Continuous learning and adaptation of these search techniques will undoubtedly enrich nursing practice and contribute to the profession’s goal of delivering high-quality care grounded in the strongest evidence.

References

• Davies, K. S. (2011). Formulating the evidence-based practice question: a review of the frameworks. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 75-80.
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
• Walden University Library. (2018). Levels of evidence. Retrieved from
• Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2015). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice. Wolters Kluwer.
• Grimes, D. A., & Schulz, K. F. (2002). An overview of clinical research: The lay of the land. The Lancet, 359(9300), 57-61.
• Hanson, C. (2018). Evidence-based practice: An integrative approach to nursing research. Journal of Nursing Education, 57(12), 677-679.
• LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2018). Nursing research: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice. Elsevier.
• Cochrane Library. (2020). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Retrieved from https://www.cochranelibrary.com/
• United States National Library of Medicine. (2019). PubMed Overview. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
• Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2014). The evidence-based practice process: The importance of systematic review. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 46(1), 57-63.