dBenchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project—Paper on Diabetes
Max Points: 125
Identify a research or evidence-based article that focuses comprehensively on a specific intervention or new diagnostic tool for the treatment of diabetes in adults or children.
In a paper of 750-1,000 words, summarize the main idea of the research findings for a specific patient population. Research must include clinical findings that are current, thorough, and relevant to diabetes and the nursing practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.
entify a research or evidence-based article that focuses comprehensively on a specific intervention or new diagnostic tool for the treatment of diabetes in adults or children
n a paper of 750-1,000 words, summarize the main idea of the research findings for a specific patient population. Research must include clinical findings that are current, thorough, and relevant to diabetes and the nursing practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide,
Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project—Paper on Diabetes
Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%
|30.0 %Research or Evidence-Based Article Identified. Article Focuses on a Specific Diabetic Intervention or New Diagnostic Tool.||Research or evidence-based article not identified.||Research or evidence-based article identified but does not address a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool.||Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses on a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool in general.||Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses on a specific diabetic intervention and a diagnostic tool.||Research or evidence-based article identified that focuses on a specific diabetic intervention or diagnostic tool in a comprehensive manner, allowing all criteria of assignment to be fully addressed.|
|50.0 %Summary of Article Includes the Following Content: Discussion of Research Performed Clinical Findings, and Significance to Nursing Practice.||Content is incomplete or omits most of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria. Does not demonstrate an understanding of the basic principles. Does not demonstrate critical thinking and analysis of the overall program subject.||Content is incomplete or omits some requirements stated in the assignment criteria. Demonstrates shallow understanding of the basic principles only a surface level of evaluation is offered, methods are described but flawed or unrealistic and strategies are discussed, but incomplete.||Content is complete, but somewhat inaccurate and/or irrelevant. Demonstrates adequate understanding of the basic principles. Reasonable but limited inferences and conclusions are drawn but lack development. Supporting research is inadequate in relevance, quality, and/or currentness.||Content is comprehensive and accurate, and definitions are clearly stated. Sections form a cohesive logical and justified whole. Shows careful planning and attention to details and illuminates relationships. Research is adequate, current, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.||Content is comprehensive. Presents ideas and information beyond that presented through the course, and substantiates their validity through solid, academic research where appropriate. Research is thorough, current, and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in assignment criteria. Final paper exhibits the process of creative thinking and development of proposal. Applies framework of knowledge, practice and sound research. Shows careful planning and attention to how disparate elements fit together.|
|15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness|
|5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose||Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.||Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.||Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.|
|5.0 %Paragraph Development and Transitions||Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.||Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.||Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.||A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.||There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.|
|5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)||Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.||Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.||Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.||Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.||Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.|
|3.0 %Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.)||Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of ‘primer prose’ indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.||Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.||Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.||The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.||The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.|
|2.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment)||No reference page is included. No citations are used.||Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.||Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.||Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and GCU style is usually correct.||In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.|
|100 %Total Weightage|
In the article, Cowdery, Parker and Thompson (2010) discuss the application of the PEN-3 Model in a diabetes prevention intervention. The article utilizes the application of a community based participatory approach as well as the PEN-3 model for diabetes prevention intervention. The article uses community members to verify the needs assessment results. The PEN‐3 model focuses on placing culture at the forefront of health promotion. It involves three dimensions, which are cultural identity, relationships and expectations, and cultural empowerment. The article thus seeks to provide a solution to the risk of diabetes with interventions salient for the population to enhance the intervention’s sustainability and adoption.
Summary of the Article
The article uses the African-American adult population for the study in a three-year NIH-funded project. Thirteen elicitation interviews, 217 surveys, and 3 focus groups were utilized to arrive at the findings. The authors majored on questions, such as whether the respondents knew about diabetes, lack of culturally sensitive materials, influence of family on perceptions and behaviors, sense of inevitability, as well as the issues of denial and stigma.
The main findings show that Diabetes is a major health concern among community members and health care givers. The researchers identified significant issues, such as the application of culturally appropriate education and intervention strategies as well as Diabetes risk and prevention. The most effective interventions come about as a result of culture and cultural competency recognition with the aim of eliminating diabetes (Ali, Echouffo-Tcheugui & Williamson, 2012).
The researchers found that the barriers to successful Diabetes education and prevention involved a lack of classes as well as covered by insurance. It also involved a lack of social support whereby providers walking groups were available although clients were hesitant to join without family or friends. The respondents who took the interviews thought that many services were available to the community despite barriers in getting people to use them. The reasons given for lack of service uptake included issues of cost, transportation, and general lack of coordination between health and service care facilities (Vincent et al., 2014). The findings from the three focus groups included the incentives, clearly engaged marketing materials, convenient location and time of day, and availability of transportation. Most of the participants were in favor of an interactive group setting similar to the focus groups.
Proposed Integration of Intervention
The integration of intervention using the PEN-3 model for the treatment of diabetes involves lifestyle interventions and preconception care among women, intensive glucose management, and patient education. The model provides room for empowerment to create culturally appropriate alterations for diverse populations. Using populations in a community, the model allows program planners and health educators to prepare culturally competent diabetes education programs that boost diabetes self-management skills. As such, the model focuses on alleviating inaccuracies, myths, and fears about the disease.
The surveys used in the needs assessment process defined as African-American adults living in the high-risk zones. The respondents identified family as their primary influence on dietary habits and was also influential in exercise habits. Seventy one percent of the sample was female with the majority of respondents describing themselves as African American. Seventy-five percent of respondents identified their physician as their primary source of health information with family and friends and other sources, such as the Internet and broadcast media being identified by 30 percent of respondents. Physicians were found to command the highest percentage of trust for health information at 74 percent while 47 percent of respondents identified family members as a trusted source of information signifying a greater reliance on family.
The results from the community dialogue indicated that family was the foundation of most of the respondents’ lives with the researchers finding that family history is what connects folks. Further, interventions should educate meal preparers since these are the individuals who influence food choices. Family gatherings were found to be potential educational opportunities while families living with Diabetes or those at risk, knowledge was the focus of intervention.
Explanation of the Intervention on Nursing Practice
The PEN-3 model is useful in the nursing practice as it provides an examination of cultural practices that are important for positive health behaviors, the adverse factors that are likely to occasion negative influence on health, as well as unique practices that have a neutral impact on health. It also centralizes culture in the study of health behaviors in the development of interventions. The model involves a Cultural Empowerment domain, which make it easier to explore health problems by identifying positive beliefs and practices, exploring the underlining values and beliefs that are existential and have no harmful health consequences, before identifying negative health practices that serve as barriers.
The research and the PEN-3 model impact the nursing profession by providing self-management skills essential for diabetes care thus supporting the nursing staff to manage and assist people stay health as well as prevent complications. Community education using the model ensures that health care givers increase the provision and uptake of diabetes self-management education for good patient care. The elements of the research also provide a basis for further research in the nursing profession, especially for diabetes specialist nurses who are tasked with providing training, education, and support to non-specialist care experts, for example, nurses in care homes and secondary, primary, and community settings, as well as general practitioners. Education on diabetes would thus ensure fewer emergency room visits and hospitalizations, which would contribute to resource conservation and improving diabetes care in the nursing profession.
Ali, M. K., Echouffo-Tcheugui, J. B., & Williamson, D. F. (2012). How Effective Were Lifestyle Interventions in Real-World Settings That Were Modeled on the Diabetes Prevention Program? Health Affairs, 31(1), pp. 67-75.
Cowdery, J. E., Parker, S., & Thompson, A. (2010). Application of the PEN-3 Model in a Diabetes Prevention Intervention. Journal of Health Disparities Research and Practice, 4(1), pp. 3.
Vincent, D., McEwen, M. M., Hepworth, J. T., & Stump, C. S. (2014). The Effects of a Community-Based, Culturally Tailored Diabetes Prevention Intervention for High-Risk Adults of Mexican Descent. The Diabetes Educator, 40(2), pp. 202-213.
December 6, 2017
November 24, 2017
November 24, 2017