NURSING RESEARCH: PART 1 AND 2
Research question:” For nurses taking care of patients in health care settings, how can safety interventions as compared to no intervention reduce medication error?”.
Please utilize APA 7th edition
Copyright 2019
This content is licensed
under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License.
ISSN: 1679-4508 | e-ISSN: 2317-6385
Official Publication of the Instituto Israelita
de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein
HEALTH ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT
1
einstein (So Paulo). 2019;17(4):1-5
Medication errors in emergency
departments: is electronic medical
record an effective barrier?
Erros de medicao em unidades de pronto atendimento:
pronturio eletrnico, barreira eficaz?
Marina Vaidotas1, Paula Kiyomi Onaga Yokota1, Neila Maria Marques Negrini1,
Dafne Braga Diamante Leiderman1, Valria Pinheiro de Souza1,
Oscar Fernando Pavo dos Santos1, Nelson Wolosker1
1 Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, So Paulo, SP, Brazil.
DOI: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2019GS4282
ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare medication errors in two emergency departments with electronic medical
record, to two departments that had conventional handwritten records at the same organization.
Methods: A cross-sectional, retrospective, descriptive, comparative study of medication errors
and their classification, according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error
Reporting and Prevention, associated with the use of electronic and conventional medical records,
in emergency departments of the same organization, during one year. Results: There were 88
events per million opportunities in the departments with electronic medical record and 164
events per million opportunities in the units with conventional medical records. There were more
medication errors when using conventional medical record in 9 of 14 categories of the National
Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention. Conclusion: The emergency
departments using electronic medical records presented lower levels of medication errors, and
contributed to a continuous improvement in patients safety.
Keywords: Medication errors; Harm reduction; Medical records systems, computerized; Electronic
prescribing; Emergency medical services
RESUMO
Objetivo: Comparar os erros de medicaes de duas unidades de pronto atendimento que
possuam pronturio eletrnico aos de duas unidades que possuam pronturio convencional
manual em uma mesma instituio. Mtodos: Estudo transversal, retrospectivo, descritivo,
que comparou a incidncia de erros de medicaes e sua classificao, segundo o National
Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention, associado ao uso do pronturio
eletrnico e do convencional, em unidades de pronto atendimento de uma mesma instituio por
um ano. Resultados: Foram observados 88 eventos por milho de oportunidades nas unidades
com pronturio eletrnico e 164 por milho de oportunidades nas unidades com pronturio
convencional. Houve mais erros de medicaes nas unidades com pronturio convencional
em 9 das 14 categorias da National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and
Prevention analisadas. Concluso: Com a utilizao do pronturio eletrnico, as unidades de
pronto atendimento apresentaram menores ndices de erros de medicaes, contribuindo para
melhoria continuada na segurana do paciente.
Descritores: Erros de medicao; Reduo do dano; Sistemas computadorizados de registros
mdicos; Prescrio eletrnica; Servios mdicos de emergncia
How to cite this article:
Vaidotas M, Yokota PK, Negrini NM,
Leiderman DB, Souza VP, Santos OF, et al.
Medication errors in emergency
departments: is electronic medical record an
effective barrier? einstein (So Paulo).
2019;17(4):eGS4282. http://dx.doi.
org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2019GS4282
Corresponding author:
Marina Vaidotas
Cerner Millenium
Avenida Albert Einstein, 627/701, 2 floor,
building B Morumbi
Zip code: 05652-900 So Paulo, SP, Brazil
Phone: (55 11) 2151-2474
E-mail: [emailprotected]
Received on:
Oct 3, 2017
Accepted on:
Dec 28, 2018
Conflict of interest:
none.
http://dx.doi.org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2019GS4282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2019GS4282
mailto:[emailprotected]
Vaidotas M, Yokota PK, Negrini NM, Leiderman DB, Souza VP, Santos OF, Wolosker N
2
einstein (So Paulo). 2019;17(4):1-5
INTRODUCTION
According to the National Coordinating Council for
Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC
MERP), medication error (ME) is the mistaken use
or even the non-administration of a medication that
results in harm to the patient (regardless of severity).(1)
The events can be linked to professional practice,
healthcare products, medical procedures, and
prescription systems. There may be errors in prescription
items, in communication of the prescription, in the
text of the product label, in the package and name
of the medication, in its composition, distribution,
and administration, in the training of professionals, and
in the supervision of medication use.(1)
According to what is divulged by the Center
of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in the
United States alone, in 2012, events related to ME
were responsible for more than 700 thousand cases
of emergency and 120 thousand hospital admissions,
with an estimated expenditure of more than
US$ 3.5 billion, approximately 40.0% of which were
avoidable events.(2) With the development of new
medications and aging of the population, these
numbers may grow even more.(2,3)
The use of the Electronic Medical Records (EMR)
is a support tool for administration of medications.
There is a hypothesis that the EMR acts in preventing
failures, with a potential for checking the entire
process, from input of an item on prescription to its
administration. Any system that increases supervision
and checking of each one of these steps has the
potential of improving patients safety, regardless of
complexity of the technological solution adopted in
this process.(4-7)
Some studies evaluated the use of electronic
prescriptions with the purpose of minimizing ME,
and were carried out in several hospital settings. The
majority, however, involved uncontrolled methods
or used a control group not equivalent to the cases
analyzed.(8-10) Our hospital has four physically
separated emergency departments (ED) that allow
us to develop a controlled clinical study.
OBJECTIVE
To analyze, in a controlled manner, the administration of
medications to patients of four emergency departments
in a single organization; in that, two units used the
electronic medical record, and two, the conventional
handwritten record.
METHODS
A cross-sectional, retrospective, and observational
study was conducted comparing ME in both scenarios
of the same organization: the use of EMR versus the
conventional handwritten record. All cases of ME
reported in a one-year period were analyzed. The
study was assessed by the organization Research
Ethics Committee, opinion no. 452.994, CAAE:
20182113.7.0000.0071.
The ME were reported in all ED included in the
study. The two ED that routinely used the conventional
handwritten records were denominated Units 1 and 2,
and the other emergency departments using the EMR,
were called Units 3 and 4. These ED are physically
independent, in different regions of the city of So
Paulo (SP), but under management, administration,
and coordination of similar teams with training and
orientation of identical organizational protocols.
The similarity of the population seen at the four ED
was marked by the major complaint upon admission,
and the productivity of the units, that is, patients per
physician, nursing team and pharmacist of the ED.
All cases reported by means of the electronic
recording of events were included and duly investigated
by the department in charge. The entire initial ME
notifications that did not confirm having a ME as root
cause were excluded from the investigation.
To evaluate the adverse events, we compared the
number of ME per million opportunities (DPMO –
defects per million opportunities). We compared these
occurrences between the two groups. The process phase
in which the failure happened and led to the ME and
its severity was classified according to the NCC MERP(1)
and is presented on table 1.
Table 1. Classification of the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error
Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP)
NCC MERP Classification
1 Wrong medication
2 Wrong dose
3 Error in preparation/handling
4 Prior history of allergies
5 Wrong concentration/dilution
6 Not administered
7 Wrong patient
8 Wrong infusion rate
9 Wrong route
10 Wrong frequency delay in administration
11 Wrong administration technique
12 Unauthorized administration of the medication
13 Medication is contraindicated for the patient
14 Medication with expired validity date / deteriorated
Source: translated and adapted from National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention
(NCC MERP). About medication error. What is a medication error [Internet]. 2001 [cited 2005 Jan 10]. Available from:
https://www.nccmerp.org/about-medication-errors
Medication errors in emergency departments: is electronic medical record an effective barrier?
3
einstein (So Paulo). 2019;17(4):1-5
The rate of ME was calculated based on the ratio
between the number of reported ME by the total number
of patients eligible in each organization, multiplied by 1
million, so that the measurement was in DPMO. The
types of ME and diagnoses were described as absolute
frequencies and percentages. The comparison between
the groups as to error rates was done descriptively, by
calculating the total number of ME during the period
studied, and inferentially, by comparing the monthly
rate of ME, in each group, using the Mann-Whitneys
non-parametric test.
RESULTS
The confirmation of the similarity between the different
ED was marked by means of an analysis of the type of
diseases treated in each one (Table 2).
The units presented with the same complexity
profile of the patients. The workload per healthcare
professional (physician, nurses, and pharmacist) for
each ED is presented on table 3.
Unit 2 had the largest number of patients seen
during the period and per pharmacist/month, and Unit
4 had the largest number of patients per physician
and per nursing team. The distribution of ME events
reported as per the NCC MERP classification during
the period of 12 months is presented on table 4.
We found a larger number of ME in the units
with the conventional records as compared to those
with EMR (33 versus 11, respectively). The number of
patients seen at units with conventional records was
greater than with EMR.
In units that worked with the conventional records,
the type of medication, dose, and administration to
allergic individuals were the most frequent MEs, and
in the units with EMR, the most common MEs were
related to preparation/handling, wrong patient, wrong
route, and wrong administration technique.
Table 2. Profile of the units as to The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10)(11)
Diagnosis Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4
Not informed 8.27 3.33 6.53 6.02
J06 Acute upper respiratory infections of multiple and unspecified sites 7.09 4.98 7.68 5.37
J01.0 Acute maxillary sinusitis 4.20 0.03 4.94 3.90
J03.9 Acute tonsillitis, unspecified 3.72 2.84 5.12 4.80
J02.0 Streptococcal pharyngitis 3.51 0.03 2.56 1.66
J11.0 Influenza with pneumonia virus not identified 2.97 1.57 1.33 0.35
A09.0 Diarrhea and gastroenteritis of presumed infectious origin 2.96 5.00 5.30 4.81
M54.5 Low back pain 2.20 1.90 1.42 2.02
N39.0 Urinary tract infection, site not specified 1.89 2.14 2.06 1.79
R51.0 Headache 1.87 1.19 1.68 2.34
R10.0 Acute abdomen 1.47 0.02 1.22 3.16
R05.0 Cough 1.21 0.93 2.22 4.05
H66.9 Otitis media, unspecified 1.18 2.29 2.58 0.81
J06.9 Acute upper respiratory infection, unspecified 0.61 4.60 1.43 2.15
Results expressed as percentage.
Table 3. Workload per healthcare professional category
Patients per professional category Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Total
Patients seen during the period 50,534 151,130 51,509 73,844 327,017
Patients per physician/month 122.16 144.44 141.12 148.03 140.72
Patients per nursing team/month 88.37 83.37 96.22 114.52 91.73
Patients per pharmacist/month 692.25 2,070.27 705.60 867.05 1,075.12
Vaidotas M, Yokota PK, Negrini NM, Leiderman DB, Souza VP, Santos OF, Wolosker N
4
einstein (So Paulo). 2019;17(4):1-5
DISCUSSION
Prevention of ME depends on processes implemented
in the professional culture and their monitoring,
helping to control these events. The most often used
methodology for this is the 5 correct, modified
to 9 correct, which is based on checking before
administering: medication, patient, access route, dose,
correct time – besides the four additional items: correct
time, approach, validity, and documenting.(4)
As to productivity per healthcare professional
category, the number of cases seen at an ED that used
conventional records was greater than in the unit that
had EMR; that is, there was also a greater possibility
of a ME, which could have influenced in its greater
occurrence when compared to EMR. Nevertheless,
the number of patients per unit is also accompanied by
greater capacity to receive them, with a larger nursing
team for administration of medications, as was verified
in the productivity of each ED. Taking into account that
the teams of all emergency departments were selected
and trained in the same way, and follow the same
safety protocol, the ED with EMR had a noteworthy
smaller incidence of events, which can suggest that the
implementation of EMR in the other units would help
in reducing ME.
The use of EMR is amply recognized as a component
that enables access of the multidisciplinary team to the
patients data, which contributes to improvement of
communication among these professionals, helps in
clinical decisions, and improves compliance with the use of
some primordial medications in certain clinical situations.(10)
It is also related to patients safety, since it allows better
quality of information and greater pharmacovigilance
due to traceability enabled by the system.(8) In
systematic reviews, publications demonstrating effective
improvement of the time spent by nurses for recording
procedures in the medical records were identified.
When the equipment is available at the bedside, time
spent is reduced by 24.5%, but when it is kept in a central
location, it was by 23.5%.(9)
According to what is described in the literature,
units with EMR (3 and 4) demonstrated lower ME
rates as compared to the units that use conventional
records (1 and 2). The difference was not statistically
significant (p=0.773) and that could be justified by
the low number of ME, which lowers the statistical
relevance of this datum.
One of the tools that the EMR system provides is
safety warnings at different steps of the prescription,
separation, and administration of the medication,
similar to the results obtained at Australians organizations
with the implementation of EMR.(8,10)
It is possible to perceive that when ME occur in the
units with EMR, they are mostly related to preparation/
Table 4. Reported ME events according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) over the period of 12 months
NCC MERP Classification Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Total % p value
Wrong medication 0 11 0 1 12 27.27 0.037
Wrong dose 2 4 1 0 7 15.91 0.262
Error in preparation/handling 0 2 1 1 4 9.09 0.640
History of allergies 0 4 0 0 4 9.09 0.030
Wrong concentration/dilution 0 2 0 0 2 4.55 0.527
Not administered 0 2 0 0 2 4.55 0.527
Wrong patient 0 0 0 2 2 4.55 0.147
Wrong infusion rate 0 2 0 0 2 4.55 0.527
Wrong route 0 0 1 1 2 4.55 0.147
Wrong frequency delay in administration 0 2 0 0 2 4.55 0.527
Wrong administration technique 0 0 1 1 2 4.55 0.147
Unauthorized administration of the medication 0 1 0 0 1 2.27 >0.999
Medication contraindicated for the patient 0 1 0 0 1 2.27 >0.999
Medication with expired validity date/deteriorated 0 0 1 0 1 2.27 >0.999
Total 2 31 5 6 44 0.069a
Partial total per type of patient record 33 (75.00) 11 (25.00) 44
Patients seen per period 50,534 151,130 51,509 73,844 327,017
Partial total DPMO per type of patient record 164 (65.07) 88 (34.93) 252 (100.00)
Results expressed as n or n (%). DPMO: defects per million opportunities.
Medication errors in emergency departments: is electronic medical record an effective barrier?
5
einstein (So Paulo). 2019;17(4):1-5
handling of medication, wrong patient, wrong route,
and wrong administration technique, as per the NCC
MERP classification,(1) which are errors related to
the health professionals attention to the medication
administration procedures.
On the other hand, in the units with conventional
records, ME are more frequently associated to wrong
medication, wrong dose, history of allergies, types
of ME related to the legibility of prescription and its
incomplete filling out, in which the most critical point
is the absence of information regarding allergies to
medications. This type of error can be blocked by the
electronic digital system managed by pharmacists.
These professionals can block or alert that what was
prescribed with a wrong administration route or wrong
dose, besides notifying the prescriber of the error
made,(12,13) requiring the correction of the prescription
before its dispensing. Additionally, the verification of
allergies and the patients weight is mandatory, for greater
safety of the process of medication administration.
In this study, the adverse errors related to the use
of medications were present more frequently in the
age range from zero to 9 years, similar to what was
found in an American study.(8) There were no cases
of elderly patients, despite the frequent use of several
medications, and consequently, an increased chance of
error.(14,15) More robust analyses with larger numbers of
patients and events need to be conducted to show that
the EMR contributes towards ongoing improvement
in patient safety.
CONCLUSION
The use of electronic medical record at emergency
departments units was associated with lower rates of
medication errors in this study.
AUTHORS INFORMATION
Vaidotas M: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5911-1774
Yokota PK: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7615-6445
Negrini NM: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5432-1948
Leiderman DB: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8593-6427
Souza VP: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1083-9857
Santos OF: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8731-1201
Wolosker N: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1991-3507
REFERENCES
1. National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention
(NCC MERP). About medication error. What is a medication error [Internet].
2001 [cited 2005 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.nccmerp.org/
about-medication-errors
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Medication safety program
[Internet]. 2010 sep 28 [cited 2013 Apr 3]. Available from: https://www.cdc.
gov/medicationsafety/index.html
3. Massad E, Marin HF, Azevedo Neto RS, editores. O pronturio eletrnico do
paciente na assistncia, informao e conhecimento mdico [Internet]. So
Paulo: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de So Paulo; Universidade
Federal de So Paulo So Paulo; Organizao Pan Americana da Sade;
2003 [citado 2013 Abr 16]. 202 p. Disponvel em: http://www.sbis.org.br/
biblioteca_virtual/prontuario.pdf
4. Conselho Regional de Enfermagem de So Paulo (COREN). Uso seguro de
medicamentos: guia para preparo, administrao e monitoramento [Internet].
So Paulo: COREN; 2017 [citado 2018 Set 11]. Disponvel em: https://portal.
coren-sp.gov.br/sites/default/files/uso-seguro-medicamentos.pdf
5. Kralewski JE, Dowd BE, Kaissi A. The influence of the structure and culture
of medical group practice on prescription drug errors. Medical Care. 2005;
43(8):817-25.
6. Krohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To err is human: building a
safer health care system. Washington (DC): National Academy Press; 2000.
7. Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI). How to guide: prevent harm
from high-alert medication [internet]. Cambridge (MA): IHI; 2012 [cited
2013 May 20]. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/
HowtoGuidePreventHarmfromHighAlertMedications.aspx
8. Johnson KB, Lehmann CU; Council on Clinical Information Technology of
the American Academy of Pediatrics. Electronic prescribing in pediatrics:
toward safer and more effective medication management. Pediatrics.
2013;131(4):e1350-6. Review.
9. Poissant L, Pereira J, Tamblyn R, Kawasumi Y. The impact of electronic health
records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: a systematic review. J
Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12(5):505-16.
10. Westbrook JI, Reckmann M, Li L, Runciman WB, Burke R, Lo C, et al. Effects
of two commercial electronic prescribing systems on prescribing error
rates in hospital in-patients: a before and after study. PLoS Med. 2012;
9(1):e1001164.
11. Organizao Mundial da Sade (OMS). CID-10: classificao estatstica
internacional de doenas e problemas relacionados sade. 10a ed rev. So
Paulo: Edusp; 2008.
12. Reynolds M, Jheeta S, Benn J, Sanghera I, Jacklin A, Ingle D, et al. Improving
feedback on junior doctors prescribing errors: mixed-methods evaluation of a
quality improvement project. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(3):240-7. Review.
13. Kaur S, Mitchell G, Vitetta L, Roberts MS. Interventions that can reduce
inappropriate prescribing in the elderly: a systematic review. Drug Aging.
2009;26(12):1013-28.
14. Merle L, Laroche ML, Dantoine T, Charmes JP. Predicting and preventing
adverse drug reactions in the very old. Drugs Aging. 2005;22(5):375-92.
15. Varkey P, Reller MK, Resar RK. Basics of quality improvement in healthcare.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82(6):735-9. Review.
https://www.nccmerp.org/about-medication-errors
https://www.nccmerp.org/about-medication-errors
https://www.cdc.gov/medicationsafety/index.html
https://www.cdc.gov/medicationsafety/index.html
http://www.sbis.org.br/biblioteca_virtual/prontuario.pdf
http://www.sbis.org.br/biblioteca_virtual/prontuario.pdf
https://portal.coren-sp.gov.br/sites/default/files/uso-seguro-medicamentos.pdf
https://portal.coren-sp.gov.br/sites/default/files/uso-seguro-medicamentos.pdf
http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/HowtoGuidePreventHarmfromHighAlertMedications.aspx
http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/HowtoGuidePreventHarmfromHighAlertMedications.aspx
Copyright of Einstein (16794508) is the property of Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa
Albert Einstein and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use. 6
Individual: Analyzing Published Research Articles (IAPRA) Paper
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to interpret the article as most relevant to the group topic.
Analyze one primary data research article most relevant to your group topic and research question.
Course Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies (PO#4 & 8).
CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and clinical significance related to evidence-based
practice (PO#4 & 8).
Due Date (please see course calendar for specific dates/times)
Week 4, Part I
Week 4, Part II
Week 5, Part III
Week 5, Part IV
Week 6, Part V
Week 6, Part VI
The Late Assignment Policy applies to this assignment.
Points Possible
: 220 Points
Paper Preparation:
It is NOT acceptable to use bullet-points in the body of text review paper.
All review contents must be PARAPHRASED with your OWN words with in-text citations.
It is NOT acceptable to QUOTE article contents
EXCEPT
the
Purpose of Study
as required.
Paper must include all required APA-Style/Format
Do
NOT
leave blank for any of these review elements.
Any review element left blank will get 0 point: If authors did not provide information or it was not applicable for certain elements, make note such as No information was given or Not applicable
PLAGIARISM: Turnitin Percentage
Less than 25 percentage: Acceptable percentage.
Turnitin Draft Submission Box
Submit your draft of paper into Turnitin Draft Submission Box to check your percentage as many times as needed before you submit your final paper to designated Unit.
If your Final paper has 25% or higher percentage, you must revise/modify your paper contents
BEFORE
you submit your paper due date and time.
If your Final paper has 25% or higher percentage
AT/AFTER
you submit your final paper due date and time, Academic Integrity Violation Procedures will be initiated
Academic Integrity Violation Procedure
Academic Integrity Violation letter will be sent to student
Assignment Grade will be 0 point
The violation case will be reviewed, and a further sanction will be determined by the Administrators
Individual Analyzing Published Research Article (IAPRA)
Part I: Research Question, Purpose, Variables and Participants
Research Question
Clearly and concisely states your group research question as formulated in PICO format.
Purpose of the Study
Describe the purpose/aim of the study as the author stated in the article: may cut & paste
Do
NOT
change or modify the purpose statement on the article
Variables
Identify study variables from the above stated Purpose of Study
Quantitative Study: Dependent & Independent Variables
OR
Descriptive, Qualitative Study: Variables of Interest
Participants
Enrollment: How did they recruit/enroll eligible participants in the study?
Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria: Describe Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria
Total Participant Numbers: Total numbers of participants in the study
Part II: Intervention Procedures/Obtaining Information Procedures
Quantitative Study
Intervention/Treatment Group
Describe the intervention contents given to Intervention group
Describe how the contents were given to Intervention group
Identify the person who provided Intervention contents to Intervention group
Control Group: If the study has Control Group
Describe the contents given to Control group
Describe how the contents were given to Control group
Identify the person who provided contents to Control group
OR
Descriptive/Qualitative Study: Obtaining Information Procedure
Describe the detailed procedure for obtaining information/data (i.e. made appointment to meet each participant, visited home/met in clinical settingetc)
Part III: Data Collection Procedures & Measurement Tools/Instruments
Describe ALL methods to collect data in detail (i.e. interview, survey, observationetc.)
Describe
each
measurement tool/instrument used to measure/assess outcomes in the study in detail.
Part IV: Results/Findings
Participant Characteristics/Sociodemographic Findings
Describe participant characteristics or sociodemographic status
Must be objective, descriptive, and comprehensive
Must describe the findings of Tables/Figures to provide comprehensive information about participant characteristics as article provided.
Study Results/Findings
Describe
ALL
Other Results/Findings besides above participant characteristics in detail.
Each result item must include Headings/Subheadings as the article provided.
Do
NOT
simply saying pain level was decreased, adherence was increasedetc
Do
NOT
include contents from Discussion and/or Conclusion in the article.
Part V: Synthesis of Findings
Synthesis of Findings
Describe the
Rationale/Mechanism
for how/why
Finding
of each intervention/factor helps your Research Question (i.e. how/what mechanism does music therapy help pain, how does sucking stimulation increase oral intake for pre-term infants)
Should
NOT
repeat same contents you had on Findings section and/or article
May include citations from other sources for above described rationale/mechanism (i.e. textbooks, CDCetc)
Nursing Implications
How the nurses can implement the research findings into nursing practice.
Part VI: Group Article Summary Table (All group members)
Describe each group members article on Research Article Summary Table.
Use bullet points for each review content
Grading Rubric & Description for IAPRA
Part I (40)
Research Question
5
Accurately/Clearly states groups Research Question as your group formulated
Format
5
Followed APA format for paper, in-text citation, references.
Purpose of Study
5
Describe the purpose of the study as the author stated in the article.
Do
NOT
change or modify the statement on the article
Variables
10
Identify study variables from the above stated Purpose of Study
Quantitative Study: Dependent & Independent variables
OR
Descriptive, Qualitative Study: Variables of Interest
Participants
5
5
5
Enrollment: How did they recruit eligible participants in the study?
Eligibility: Describe Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria
Numbers: Total numbers of participants in the study
Part II (45)
Intervention Procedures
Obtaining Information Procedures
40
Quantitative Study:
Intervention Group: Describe the detailed Intervention contents, procedures, and person who provided Intervention for Intervention group.
Control Group: Describe the detailed contents, procedures, and person who provided contents for Control group
OR
Descriptive Study:
Describe the detailed procedure for obtaining information/data (i.e. made appointment to meet each participant, visited home/met clinicaletc)
Format
5
Followed APA format for paper and in-text citations
Part III (40)
Data Collection
Measurement Tools
5
35
Describe ALL data collection methods in detail (i.e. survey, interview, observation)
Describe each measurement tool/instrument used to measure study outcomes in detail.
Format
5
Followed APA format for paper and in-text citations
Part IV (50)
Participant Characteristics/Sociodemographic Findings
All other Results/Findings
15
30
Must be descriptive and comprehensive
Describe participant characteristics or sociodemographic findings
Describe the findings of Tables/Figures to provide comprehensive information about participant characteristics as article provided
Describe
ALL
Other Results/Findings besides above participant characteristics in the article in detail for each Result item
Each Result item must include Headings/Subheadings of Results as the article provided.
Do
NOT
simply saying pain level was decreased, adherence was increased
Do
NOT
include contents from Discussion and/or Conclusion in the article.
Format
5
Followed APA format for paper and in-text citations
Part V (20)
Synthesis of Findings
10
Describe the
Rationale
for how/why
Finding
of each intervention/factor helps your Research Question (i.e. how/what mechanism does music therapy help pain, how does sucking stimulation increase oral intake for pre-term infants)
Should
NOT
repeat same contents you had on Findings section and/or article
Should have citation of analyzed article(s)
May include citations from other sources for above described rationale and mechanism (i.e. textbooks, CDCetc)
Nursing Implication
5
How the nurses can implement the research findings into nursing practice?
Format
5
Followed APA format for paper, in-text citation, references.
Part VI (25)
Article Summary Table (Group)
25
Describe article on Research Article Summary Table
Use
bullet points
for each review content
Submit Table as separate document
Total Points: 220 Points
