Evidence-Based Practice and the Quadruple Aim
Healthcare organizations continually seek to optimize healthcare performance. For years, this approach was a three-pronged one known as the Triple Aim, with efforts focused on improved population health, enhanced patient experience, and lower healthcare costs.
More recently, this approach has evolved to a Quadruple Aim by including a focus on improving the work life of healthcare providers. Each of these measures are impacted by decisions made at the organizational level, and organizations have increasingly turned to EBP to inform and justify these decisions.
To Prepare:
- Read the articles by Sikka, Morath, & Leape (2015); Crabtree, Brennan, Davis, & Coyle (2016); and Kim et al. (2016) provided in the Resources.
- Reflect on how EBP might impact (or not impact) the Quadruple Aim in healthcare.
- Consider the impact that EBP may have on factors impacting these quadruple aim elements, such as preventable medical errors or healthcare delivery.
To Complete:
Write a brief analysis (no longer than 2 pages) of the connection between EBP and the Quadruple Aim.
Your analysis should address how EBP might (or might not) help reach the Quadruple Aim, including each of the four measures of:
- Patient experience
- Population health
- Costs
- Work life of healthcare providers
Learning Resources
Note: To access this module’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.
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 1, “Making the Case for Evidence-Based Practice and Cultivating a Spirit of Inquiry” (pp. 7–32)
Boller, J. (2017). Nurse educators: Leading health care to the quadruple aim sweet spot. Journal of Nursing Education, 56(12), 707–708. doi:10.3928/01484834-20171120-01
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Crabtree, E., Brennan, E., Davis, A., & Coyle, A. (2016). Improving patient care through nursing engagement in evidence-based practice. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 13(2), 172–175. doi:10.1111/wvn.12126
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Kim, S. C., Stichler, J. F., Ecoff, L., Brown, C. E., Gallo, A.-M., & Davidson, J. E. (2016). Predictors of evidence-based practice implementation, job satisfaction, and group cohesion among regional fellowship program participants. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 13(5), 340–348. doi:10.1111/wvn.12171
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010). Evidence-based practice: Step by step. The seven steps of evidence-based practice. American Journal of Nursing, 110(1), 51–53. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000366056.06605.d2
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher-Ford, L., Long, L. E., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2014). The establishment of evidence-based practice competencies for practicing registered nurses and advanced practice nurses in real-world clinical settings: Proficiencies to improve healthcare quality, reliability, patient outcomes, and costs. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(1), 5–15. doi:10.1111/wvn.12021
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Sikka, R., Morath, J. M., & Leape, L. (2015). The Quadruple Aim: Care, health, cost and meaning in work. BMJ Quality & Safety, 24, 608–610. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004160
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Walden University Library. (n.d.-a). Databases A-Z: Nursing. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/az.php?s=19981
NURS_6052_Module01_Week01_Assignment_Rubric
·
Grid View
·
List View
|
Excellent |
Good |
Fair |
Poor |
Write a brief analysis of the connection between evidence-based practice and the Quadruple Aim. Your analysis should address how evidence-based practice might (or might not) help reach the Quadruple Aim, including each of the four measures of: |
77 (77%) – 85 (85%) The analysis clearly and accurately addresses in detail how evidence-based practice either supports or does not support the Quadruple Aim. |
68 (68%) – 76 (76%) The analysis accurately addresses how evidence-based practice either supports or does not support the Quadruple Aim. |
60 (60%) – 67 (67%) The analysis inaccurately or vaguely addresses how evidence-based practice either supports or does not support the Quadruple Aim. |
0 (0%) – 59 (59%) The analysis inaccurately and vaguely addresses how evidence-based practice either supports or does not support the Quadruple Aim or is missing. |
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization: |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. |
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
Written Expression and Formatting—The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) APA format errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) APA format errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) APA format errors. |