FOR THIS ACTIVITY PROFESSOR REQUEST IS, USE FOR PART 3 THE PICOT QUESTION USED IN CAPSTONE PART 2, BECAUSE IN PART ONE THE PICOT QUESTION NEED IRB APPROVAL AND THAT IS NOT ACCEPTED. SO USE PICOT QUESTION USED IN PART 2.
AFTER DONE WITH THAT CONTINUE WITH THE FOLLOWING BELOW.
ACTIVITY #1 : PLEASE USE THE TOPIC AND INFORMATION IN THE CAPSTONE PART 1 AND 2 ATTACHED, TO CONTINUE THE PART 3, ALL SECTIONS MUST BE CONNECTED,FOLLOW THE SEQUENCE OF THE DATA. PLEASE DON’T CHANGE PATIENT AGES OR LOCATIONS, JUST IMPLEMENT PART 3 AS A CONTINUATION OF PART 1 AND 2 .
CAPSTONE: PART III REQUIREMENTS:
1. Implementation/Conclusion
– Implement the change you are proposing- This should be a continuation of Part I and Part II
2. Describe the practice change; is it in the community, organizational, clinic setting and so forth
3. Discuss how you would implement and assess the change; this should include time frame, setting, participants, barriers, external and internal factors.
4. How would you evaluate the change process?
-The change must be measurable
-How would you measure or evaluate? Is there a tool to measure?
5. The literature review must support your change and implementation. Use leadership qualities and skills that will be utilized for successful completion of the project.
6. Discuss who will be invited to the proposal: who are the stakeholders?
-How will you present the information to your stakeholders?
OVERALL: The conclusion should have your Part I, II, II all put together in a thorough APA format.
-Use appropriate APA 7th Ed. format along with Syllabus outline
-Scholarly, peer-reviewed, and research articles cited should be within the last five years.
-This section PART 3 should be 3 pages long (not including the title and reference page).
-Use proper in-text citations with a properly formatted reference list.
-All papers must be written in the 3rd person.
AFTER DONE WITH CAPSTONE PART 3 IN 3 PAGES
PRESENT THE DOCUMENT AS ONE COHESIVE FINAL CAPSTONE PAPER. USE THE CONTENT FROM CAPSTONE I,II,III COMBINED. YOUR TITLE PAGE SHOULD YOUR REFLECT THE HEALTH PROBLEM. DO NOT WRITE I, II, OR III.
NOTE: DO NOT PROPOSE A CHANGE THAT REQUIRES IRB APPROVAL OR DIRECT HUMAN SUBJECT INVOLVEMENT.
NO PLAGIARISM MORE THAN 10%
USE ALL REQUIREMENTS CAREFULLY, THIS IS FINAL ASSIGNMENT COUNTING 30% GRADE
CHECK GRAMMAR
DUE DATE : AUGUST 11, 2023
ACTIVITY # 2- PLESE SEE THE ATTACHED POWERPOINT TEMPLATE AND COMPLETE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED ACCORDING THE CAPSTONE PART 1,2 ,3 INFORMATION GATHERED. PLEASE ADD THE SPEAKER NOTE FOR THIS SLIDE AS WELL, BE CONDENSED.
PLEASE FOLLOW STRICTLY GUIDELINES. THIS IS A FINAL ASSIGNMENT
ALL DUE DATE AUGUST 11, 2023
1
Part 1: Hospital-Acquired Infections
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor Name
Date
Part 1: Hospital-Acquired Infections
Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a public health issue. Various types of HAI include surgical site and central line-associated bloodstream infections, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Among the most common HAIs is surgical site infections which occur post-surgery in the body part that underwent the procedure. Puro et al. (2022) explain that although highly preventable, infections in surgical sites after surgery are the second most common HAIs, occurring in 2-5% of post-surgical patients, which lead to patient morbidity, mortality, and increased economic burden due to prolonged hospital stays. For infections post-surgery, focusing on risk factors that cause bacterial contamination is among the recommended strategy supported by randomized control trials. Skin preparation by bathing the patient before the operation and proper surgical wound cleaning post-surgery comprise the main recommended strategies. Cleaning or decolonization comprises using soap and water or chlorhexidine to eliminate antimicrobial-resistant pathogens that may contaminate surgical sites. The purpose of this program is to assess the effectiveness of chlorhexidine versus soap and water in reducing the rate of HAIs post-surgery.
The PICOT that will help identify the best evidence for the identified problem is: Does implementation of (I) chlorhexidine in post-surgical patients (P) compared to using soap and water (C) reduce hospital-acquired infections (O) within a period of 7 weeks (T)? Post-surgical patients are prone to HAIs attributed to wound or surgical site contamination. Alverdy et al. (2020) explain that intraoperative contamination due to the presence of organisms such as Staphylococcus aureus is the leading cause of HAIs after surgery. Skin preparation for bacteria decolonization reduces HAIs post-surgery and can be performed with chlorhexidine or soap and water. The effectiveness of either of the two methods compared to the other has yet to be sufficiently explored through research. While some information exists in other healthcare areas concerning chlorhexidine’s effectiveness, the research is uncommon in post-surgical patients. The limited studies available do not solely focus on post-surgical patients. Instead, they include patients admitted to critical care for surgery and other reasons, including trauma and other medical purposes. Subsequently, the need to focus on post-surgery patients, the second most common group of people prone to HAIs, presents a critical research gap that should be explored. Patients undergoing surgery will be subjected to ei
1
Capstone Part II
Student’s name: Natasha
Instructor
Course
Date
CAPSTONE PART II Hospital-Acquired Infection
I
ntroduction
“HAIs affect millions of people in the US annually which results in thousands of deaths” (White et al., 2019). This literature review consolidates findings from ten primary research studies and systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of chlorhexidine in comparison to soap and water during skin preparation in adult post-surgical patients aiming at reducing HAIs incidences.
1. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The existing body of literature encompasses ten primary research studies and systematic reviews, which collectively offer significant contributions to our understanding of the efficacy of chlorhexidine and soap and water as skin preparation agents in adult post-surgical populations. These studies showed the significance of appropriate skin preparation in mitigating the risk of HAIs, specifically surgical site infections (SSI).
Similarities
Most of the studies (Dockery et al., 2021; Li et al., 2022; Hasegawa et al., 2022; Ademuyiwa et al., 2022; Peel et al., 2021; Riyanto et al., 2022; Tingley & Lê, 2021) illustrated that the use of chlorhexidine had a significant reduction in the rate of HAIs in comparison to the use of soap and water. The consistent trend toward chlorhexidine’s superiority in reducing infections suggests its efficacy as a skin preparation agent. Studies (Ademuyiwa et al., 2022; Hasegawa et al., 2022; Peel et al., 2021; Riyanto et al., 2022) specifically highlighted the impact of chlorhexidine on preventing SSIs, which are one of the most common HAIs in post-surgical patients. This finding indicates the clinical importance of using chlorhexidine to reduce SSIs.
Differences
Several studies (Brown et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2018) have reported non-significant findings regarding the comparative effectiveness of chlorhexidine, soap, and water in reducing the incidence of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The studies in question exhibited smaller sample sizes, potentially compromising their statistical power and resulting in inconclusive findings. Several scholarly investigations (Marchionatti, 2022; Pilloni et al., 2021; Zukowska & Zukowski, 2022) have primarily concentrated on the aspects of wound healing and gingival tissues rather than directly comparing the efficacy of chlorhexidine and soap and water for skin preparation in patients undergoing post-surgical procedures.
Controversies
Some studies (Jackson et al., 2021; White et al., 2019) gave divergent findings that demonstrated various evidences regarding the comparative effectiveness of chlorhexidine, soap, and water in mitigatin
First Name Last Name, Title; Professor, Title; Course Name
Department and/or School
Introduction
Proposal and Conclusion
PICOT
Literature Review
Your Poster Title Goes Here:
You Can Make the Text a Bit Bigger or Smaller If Necessary
Theory/Framework
Why work with us?
Authenticity:
All of our papers are authentic, as each paper of ours is composed according to your unique requirements. Confidentiality: We value you data. Our company is extremely efficient in guarding the privacy of our clients. 100% Money Back Guarantee: In the event you cancel your order, you get your money back as soon as possible, we give a 100% refund. 24/7 Support: Our team members are available via email, live chat, and phone. Revision Policy: You can apply for a revision if you think your paper could be better. In this case, your paper will be revised either by the specialist assigned to you or by another writer.How the Platform Works
- Click on 'Place Your Order' tab on the menu or click on 'Order Now' tab at the bottom and a new order page will appear
- Fill in your requirements depending on your needs under the 'PAPER DETAILS' area
- In the next section, fill in the academic level, required number of pages, paper deadline as provided in the drop-down menus.
- To enter your registration details, click on 'CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN'. This step allows you to create an account with us for purposes of record-keeping. Click on 'PROCEED TO CHECK OUT' at the bottom of the page
- The next section requires you to fill in the payment details. Follow the guided process and soon your order will be available for our team to work on.