NURS 8310 Week 8 Assignment 4: Planning for Evaluation Paper

NURS 8310 Week 8 Assignment 4: Planning for Evaluation Paper

Assignment 4: Planning for Evaluation

The opioid use disorder (OUD) is national public health issue that needs effective mitigation and efforts to tackle it from various sectors and stakeholders. The opioid epidemic has led to increased cost of health services and burden on the system, leads to mortality and morbidity, and exerts strain on limited healthcare resources (HRSA, 2021). Evaluation of such interventions and their effects is critical as it offers an opportunity to assess their effectiveness to the target population, particularly those affected by the opioid crisis. Evaluation approaches like outcome evaluation assess the effectiveness of health promotion programs in producing positive change to reduce the severity of the opioid crisis (Haley & Saitz, 2020). The purpose of this paper is to propose an evaluation plan based on the health outcome of the “Prevention for States” program by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in helping states to have sufficient resources and support to tackle the opioid crisis or epidemic.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Evaluation Planning

The overriding purpose of evidence-based practice (EBP) programs and initiatives is to create change in target populations by addressing the causative factors of a problem and raising awareness through health promotion. Evaluation is a critical and final step of an EBP initiative as it allows implementers and other stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of an intervention or initiative (Friis & Sellers, 2021). Outcome evaluation assesses the effectiveness of an initiative in producing the desired change. Outcome evaluations focus on change witnessed in program participants and the difference it has made to such populations. The focus of outcome evaluation comprises of changes in comprehension, attitudes, behaviors, and practices that lead to modifications among the targeted individuals and populations. Outcome evaluations are mainly summative in nature. Summative evaluation entails collecting information once a program has been fully implemented to assess its impact and outcomes for stakeholders to make effective decisions on whether to adopt the initiative, continue it, or modify for improvement. Summative evaluation is a systematic approach that allows implementers to collect and analyze data about the effects of an intervention, output, and outcomes during and after its implementation (Daoust et al., 2022). Summative evaluation would, therefore, assist in measuring and determining success, the efficacy and cost implications of evidence-based practice initiatives in health care settings and organizations.

In this case, the intervention program to tackle the opioid epidemic is CDC’s “Prevention for States” that allows states to get resources and support to fight the crisis. At the core of this intervention is the need for states to develop a host of programs and initiatives aimed at tackling the opioid crisis as a public health issue in the country (CDC, 2021). Studies demonstrate that state policy interventions to address the opioid crisis are essential as they have led to a decline in cases and prescription and opioid misuse. Therefore, the evaluation plan will focus on the current data about the various state interventions in different states that are getting CDC funding and support to tackle the issue (HRSA, 2021). The outcome evaluation plan will entail having sufficient data and information from state agencies and federal departments to assess the overall effectiveness of the “Prevention for States” program by CDC. State policy interventions’ evaluation will focus on both outcome and summative approaches where the assessment will seek to understand the efficacy of each program in different states. The evaluation will focus on assessment of behavioral change among users and abusers, initiation of legal frameworks to control prescription of different schedules of drugs, and ethical conduct among providers in different professional levels.

The evaluation will also consider a host of approaches, especially a multidisciplinary approach, comprising of many interventions through one program to reduce the prevalence of opioid crisis in states, especially those worst affected and under the CDC program. The initiative provides states with federal resources and support to use in developing appropriate interventions to tackle the opioid problem (Finley et al., 2017). Access to resources, technical assistance, and training are critical since they enable providers to incorporate behavioral health care services into their practice settings to improve interventions focused on dealing with the impacts of prescription drug overdose and misuse among various affected individuals and populations (Daoust et al., 2022; Fischer et al., 2019). The “Prevention for States” programs show through its funding element the role of inter-agency and inter-government collaboration and partnership in tackling the opioid use disorder through approaches like data collection and screening for stakeholders know new and effective policies (CDC, 2021). Therefore, the evaluation plan will focus on assessing the effectiveness of each component of the program during and after its implementation to ascertain positive effects on the target population. The evaluation will consider if these interventions lead to better approach to the problem or if states should improve the initiative by creating complementary models for target population.

Conclusion

Evaluation is an essential stage in EBP projects like the one to reduce the prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD). The initiative by CDC to enhance efforts to reduce incidences of OUD in population as a national public health emergency will require evaluation using both outcome and summative approaches to ascertain its effectiveness. The evaluation will ensure that stakeholders have necessary tools and approaches to roll out the program and confer benefits to target population.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2021). Prevention for States.

https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/states/state_prevention.html

Daoust, R., Paquet, J., Marquis, M., Chauny, J. M., Williamson, D., Huard, V., … & Cournoyer,

2143425. (2022). Evaluation of Interventions to Reduce Opioid Prescribing for Patients Discharged from the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open, 5(1), e2143425-e2143425. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43425

Emily, T., Madison, B. & Charlene, E. (2019). Health promotion International: Which

literacy for health promotion: health, food, nutrition or media? Vol 35, pp. 432-444,

doi.org/10/1093/heapro/daz007.

Fischer, B., Pang, M., & Jones, W. (2020). The opioid mortality epidemic in North America: do

we understand the supply side dynamics of this unprecedented crisis? Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy, 15(1), 1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-020-0256-8

Finley, E. P., Garcia, A., Rosen, K., McGeary, D., Pugh, M. J., & Potter, J. S. (2017). Evaluating

the impact of prescription drug monitoring program implementation: a scoping review. BMC health services research, 17(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2354-5

Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones &

Bartlett. Chapter 8, “Experimental Study Designs”

Haley, D. F., & Saitz, R. (2020). The opioid epidemic during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA,

324(16), 1615-1617. DOI:10.1001/jama.2020.18543

Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) (2021). Opioid Crisis.

https://www.hrsa.gov/opioids

Lee, B., Zhao, W., Yang, K. C., Ahn, Y. Y., & Perry, B. L. (2021). Systematic evaluation of state

policy interventions targeting the US opioid epidemic, 2007-2018. JAMA network open, 4(2), e2036687-e2036687. DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36687

BUY A CUSTOM- PAPER HERE

Assignment 4: Planning for Evaluation

Section 5 of Major Assessment 7: Using an Epidemiological Approach to Critically Analyze a Population Health Problem

DNP-prepared nurses are expected to effectively use research methods to analyze data, “design evidence-based interventions, [and] predict and analyze outcomes…,” (AACN, 2006, p. 11).

Every research design requires you to evaluate your results. Epidemiologic studies are no different. In Week 7, you explored how using causal models can assist with evaluating the data analysis section of a study. In this week’s Discussion, you explored how epidemiological data are used to substantiate or negate the need for screening programs; evaluation is critical to ensure the data are sound and suitable as the basis for such decisions. As these experiences demonstrate, if the results of a study are not evaluated, they cannot be used to improve population health.

As you begin working on Assignment 4, Section 5 of the Major Assessment 7 paper, consider how you would evaluate the anticipated results of your population health intervention developed in Sections 3 and 4 of Assignment 4. As noted in the AACN Essentials of Doctoral Education for Advanced Nursing Practice, as a DNP-prepared nurse, you are expected to predict and analyze outcomes and then design evidence-based interventions based on your analysis. This Assignment provides you with an opportunity to practice that skill.

Begin developing Section 5, which is due by Day 7 of Week 9.

Review the Major Assessment Overview.
Review Exhibit 8–7: The Four Stages of Evaluation on page 350 of Epidemiology for Public Health Practice. In addition, review the articles in the Learning Resources that describe program evaluation in various settings.

Section 5: Evaluation

An evaluation plan based upon the health outcome that you have chosen and your anticipated results

You do not need to submit anything this week. Assignment 4 is due by Day 7 of Week 9.

 

NURS 8310 Epidemiology and Population Health

Major Assessment 7: Using an Epidemiological Approach to Critically Analyze a
Population Health Issue

Program LO: 1
1: Scholar/Evidence-Based Practitioner

Program LO: 6
6: Health Care Providers

DNP Essential: 3
3: Clinical Scholarship and Analytical Methods for Evidence-Based Practice

DNP Essential: 7
7: Clinical Prevention and Population Health for Improving the Nation’s Health

(Scroll down for table)
ASSIGNMENT PROMPT Target
5 points Acceptable
3 points Unacceptable
1 point Score/Level

Using an Epidemiological Approach to Critically Analyze a
Population Health Issue
Section 1: The Problem  (Application 2)

(5 points)

Program LO: 1

DNP Essential: 3, 7 Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment using advanced critical thinking skills. Discussion includes:
• A brief outline of the environment you selected (i.e., home, workplace, school)
• A summary of the selected population health problem, including a description of the characteristics of the affected population, and the magnitude of the problem based on data from appropriate data resources
• References to the data resources used
• Research question/hypothesis
Demonstrates content mastery using examples of, and/or personalized reflections about, the population health problem; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area.

Excels in meeting expectations for graduate-level work.

Fully meets expectations for LO 1

Fully meets expectations for Essential 3 and 7 Well-developed, good-quality work.
Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; demonstrates content mastery using examples of, and/or personalized reflections about, the population health problem; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area.
Fully meets expectations for graduate-level work.

Meets expectations for LO 1

Meets expectations for Essential 3 and 7
Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Content needs substantial revision for it to be of a professional portfolio quality; addresses less than 50%  of the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; consists primarily of a summary of the population health problem; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding.

Lags behind expectations for graduate-level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LO 1

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essential 3 or 7
Section 2: Research Methods
(Application 2)

(5 points)

Program LO: 1, 6

DNP Essential: 3, 7 Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment using advanced critical thinking skills. Discussion includes:
• The epidemiologic study design to assess and address the population health problem
• Assessment strategies
• Summary of the data collection activities

Creates a cogent explanation of the selected epidemiologic study design to assess. Demonstrates content mastery using sound epidemiologic principles, and/or personalized reflections about the content of the literature that supports the research design selection, assessment strategies, and data collection activities; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area.

Excels in meeting expectations for graduate-level work.

Fully meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Fully meets expectations for Essentials 3 and 7 Well-developed, good-quality work.
Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; demonstrates content mastery using sound epidemiologic principles and/or personalized reflections about, the content of the literature;  demonstrates  an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area.
Fully meets expectations for graduate-level work.

Meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Meets expectations for Essentials 3 and 7
Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Content needs substantial revision for it to be of a professional portfolio quality; addresses less than 50%  of the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; consists primarily of a summary of main ideas from the literature that support this section; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding.

Lags behind expectations for graduate-level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LO 1 and 6

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 3 and 7
Section 3: The Intervention
(Application 3)
(5 points)

Program LO: 1, 6
DNP Essential: 3, 7 Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment using advanced critical thinking skills. Discussion includes:
• An outline of an intervention to address the population health problem with your selected population based on the results of the analytic study in Section 2
• A review of the literature that supports this intervention

Demonstrates content mastery outlining an appropriate intervention that is supported by the literature using examples of, and/or personalized reflections about, the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate level work.

Fully meets expectations for LO 2

Fully meets expectations for Essential 2 Well-developed good quality work.
Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; includes some support for the suggested intervention based on the literature review; demonstrates content mastery using examples of, and/or personalized reflections about, the content of the literature review; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through personalized reflections about the content area.

Fully meets expectations for graduate-level work.

Meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Meets expectations for Essentials 3 and 7
Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.
Needs substantial revision to be worthy of a professional portfolio; addresses less than half the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; consists primarily of a summary of main ideas from the literature review; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding.

Lags behind expectations for graduate-level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LO 1 and 6

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 3 and 7
Section 4:  The Impact
(Application 3)

(5 points)

Program LO: 1, 6
DNP Essential: 3, 7 Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment using advanced critical thinking skills. Discussion includes:
• An explanation of the health outcome and the social impact of solving this issue

Demonstrates content mastery using examples of and/or personalized reflections about the content based on the literature; demonstrates an applied level of understanding of the expected health outcome and social impact of solving the problem based on the epidemiologic literature. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate-level work.

Fully meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Fully meets expectations for Essential 3 and 7 Well-developed good quality work.
Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; includes some explanation of health outcomes based on the literature; demonstrates content mastery using examples of  the expected health outcome and social impact of solving  the problem based on the epidemiologic literature.

Fully meets expectations for graduate-level work.

Meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Meets expectations for Essential3 and 7
Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.
Needs substantial revision to be worthy of a professional portfolio; addresses less than half the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; consists primarily of a summary of ideas from the literature; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding.

Lags behind expectations for graduate-level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LO 1 and 6

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essentials 3 or 7
Section 5: Evaluation
(Application 4)

(5 points)

Program LO: 1, 6

DNP Essential: 3, 7 Exemplary quality.

Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses every major subsection in the assignment; selects most appropriate evaluation method for the project and fully and clearly describes the method for evaluating the effect of the intervention using advanced critical thinking skills; demonstrates an applied level of understanding through reflections supported by the literature about the content area. Excels in meeting expectations for graduate-level work.

Fully meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Fully meets expectations for Essential 3 and 7 Well-developed, good-quality work.
Content is of a professional portfolio quality; addresses at least 80% of the major subsections in the assignment using adequate critical thinking skills; selected evaluation method is sufficient for determining the effect of the intervention and description of evaluation method is adequate; demonstration of an applied level of understanding through reflections supported by the literature about the content area. It fully meets expectations for graduate-level work.
Meets expectations for LO 1 and 6

Meets expectations for Essential 3 and 7
Superficially developed, unacceptable quality.

Needs substantial revision to be of a professional portfolio quality; addresses less than half the major subsections in the assignment using weak critical thinking skills; inappropriate evaluation method selected for the intervention and minimal description of evaluation method; does not demonstrate an applied level of understanding. Lags behind expectations for graduate-level work.

Insufficient to meet expectations for LO 1 and 6

Insufficient to meet expectations for Essential 3 and 7

NURS 8310 Epidemiology and Population Health

Major Assessment 7: Using an Epidemiological Approach to Critically Analyze a Population Health Issue

Write a 12- to 15-page paper that addresses the following:

Section 1: The Problem
• A brief outline of the environment you selected (i.e., home, workplace, school)
• A summary of your selected population health problem in terms of person, place, and time, and the magnitude of the problem based on data from appropriate data resources (Reference the data resources you used.)
• Research question/hypothesis

Section 2: Research Methods
• The epidemiologic study design you would use to assess and address your population health problem
• Assessment strategies (i.e., if you were conducting a case-control study, how would you select your cases and controls? Regarding the methods and tools you would use to make these selections, how is it convenient for you as the researcher or as the investigator to use this tool?)
• Summary of the data collection activities (i.e., how you would collect data—online survey, paper/pen, mailing)

Section 3: The Intervention
• An outline of an intervention you would implement to address the population health problem with your selected population based on the results of the study in Section 2. Note: If you selected a descriptive study design, you are still required to outline an intervention that might be developed based on future research.
• A review of the literature that supports this intervention

Section 4: The Impact
• An explanation of the health outcome you would be seeking and the social impact of solving this issue

Section 5: Evaluation
• An evaluation plan based upon the health outcome that you have chosen and your anticipated results

The Final Paper (with feedback incorporated) is due by Day 3 of Week 11. This serves as your Major Assessment for this course.

Your written assignments must follow APA guidelines. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from appropriate Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Refer to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association to ensure that your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Writing (5 points): Up to 5 points (20%) may be deducted for grammar and APA style errors.

(Total points possible: 25)