NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

Heart disease, including conditions such as coronary artery disease and heart failure, remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Managing heart disease demands vigilant monitoring, precise treatment strategies, and a comprehensive understanding of patient requirements. This assessment (NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources) will explore the significance of evidence-based approaches, methodologies for assessing credibility, and the crucial role of nursing models in the holistic care of individuals with heart disease.

Also Read:
NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 1 Locating Credible Databases and Research

Evidence-Based Approach for Heart Disease Management 

In the field of heart disease, managing polypharmacy in older patients who have multiple diseases is a quality and safety concern that would greatly benefit from an evidence-based strategy. Polypharmacy, which is defined as the use of multiple medications by the same patient, is common among older adults, particularly those with heart disease (Manisha S. et al., 2020). This problem originates from the complexities of managing multiple chronic medical conditions,  each requiring its own pharmacological treatment.

Studies consistently demonstrate that older people with heart disease who take many medications suffer negative consequences. For example, Chang et al. (2020) discovered that polypharmacy was linked to an increased risk of adverse medication responses, hospitalizations, and death in older individuals with cardiovascular disease. Similarly, the study of  Perreault et al., (2022) found that polypharmacy was independently related to a greater risk of rehospitalization and death in heart failure patients.

Heart disease is sometimes referred to as a silent killer since it develops without obvious signs until it is severe. As a result, frequent screening for heart disease risk factors and diagnostic testing like electrocardiograms  (ECGs) and echocardiograms are critical for early identification. Nurses have an important role in screening cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, and smoking, which all contribute to the development of heart disease (Khani et al., 2024).

Once identified, the treatment of heart disease requires adhering to established guidelines and criteria to develop particular treatment plans. Given the wide range of information (NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources) accessible on heart disease care, nurses must evaluate the reliability of research and resources to inform their practice successfully.

Evidence-based guidelines must be implemented in clinical practice to ensure that patients receive timely and appropriate treatment interventions aimed at slowing the progression of heart disease and preventing life-threatening complications like myocardial infarction (heart attack), heart failure, and arrhythmias. For example, research by DeVore et al. (2022), underlines the relevance of evidence-based guidelines in improving heart disease treatment, which leads to better patient outcomes and lower death rates. Nurses can contribute to the complete treatment of patients with heart disease by following evidence-based practices, which promote a higher quality of life and reduce the burden of heart disease-related morbidity and death.

Criteria to Determine Credibility of Resources

The CRAAP criteria provide a complete structure for determining the dependability of sources, including Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. This organized technique (NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources) helps to assess the reliability of journal articles and websites. A common criterion is currency, which entails determining the timeliness of information by reviewing publishing or posting dates and changes (Renirie, 2022). It is critical to ensure that the resource is up to date with the newest heart research and guidelines. Furthermore, relevance should be assessed to see if the material is relevant to the issue of heart disease, covering specific areas such as risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, or preventative techniques.

Authority is vital in determining credibility; therefore, it is important to examine the source of the material as well as the experience of the writers or organizations responsible for creating the resource. Another key requirement is accuracy, which requires verification of the information’s credibility (Renirie, 2022). This entails determining if the information is backed by evidence from peer-reviewed research, clinical trials, or reputable sources in heart disease. Finally, analyzing the resource’s aim is critical for identifying assumptions or conflicts of interest. When establishing credibility, it is vital to consider if the material is meant to educate, enlighten, advocate for, or promote specific heart disease-related products or services.

Using these criteria to evaluate a specific resource, such as the American Heart Association’s (AHA) “Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics” report, establishes its credibility. The American Heart Association updates this report regularly to include the most recent information, research results, and guidelines for heart disease and stroke (AHAjournals al., 2023). The report, written by cardiology experts and based on rigorous data collection and analysis methods, provides accurate, relevant, and authoritative information for healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers, and the general public interested in heart disease prevention and management.

Analysis of Credibility and Relevance of Evidence and Resources

In the context of heart disease, determining the trustworthiness and relevance of evidence and resources is critical to effective management and therapy. Consider the quality and safety of drug adherence among individuals with heart disease. Non-compliance with prescribed drugs has a substantial influence on patient outcomes, as it can result in disease progression, hospitalizations, and higher mortality rates.

When evaluating the reliability of data and resources on medication adherence in heart disease, various variables must be examined. Starting with assessing the currency of the material is critical to ensuring that the evidence matches the most recent research and standards in the field. Furthermore, it is critical to assess the authority of the sources. Resources written by respected organizations or cardiac professionals are more likely to include reliable information. Accuracy is another important factor to consider since evidence-based information supported by thorough research and peer-reviewed studies is more dependable. Finally, assessing the purpose of the resources aids in the identification of any assumptions or conflicts of interest that can undermine the trustworthiness of the information offered.

Clinical practice recommendations released by recognized organizations such as the American Heart Association (AHA) or the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) are among the most valuable evidence-based resources for dealing with medication adherence in heart disease (AHA and ESC et al., 2021). These guidelines are periodically updated to reflect the most recent research results and recommendations for treating heart disease. They make evidence-based recommendations for pharmaceutical treatments, patient education, and monitoring measures designed to improve drug adherence and patient outcomes.

Furthermore, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which combine data from multiple studies, could give useful insights into effective strategies for increasing medication adherence in heart disease patients. These resources give a complete summary of the current evidence, allowing healthcare professionals to make educated decisions about patient care.

Importance of Evidence-Based Practice Model

Incorporating credible evidence into an evidence-based practice model is critical for resolving quality or safety concerns and improving healthcare outcomes for specific diagnoses or situations. Healthcare professionals can use evidence-based practice models to integrate the best available information with clinical knowledge and patient preferences to influence decision-making and improve patient care (Dusin et al., 2023). For example, consider into account the problem of medication reconciliation errors resulting in adverse drug events in hospitalized patients.

Healthcare organizations can apply the Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice to build an organized method for identifying, critically evaluating, and incorporating trustworthy evidence into practice (Cullen et al., 2022). Nurses and other healthcare workers can use this methodology to approach the problem systematically. They can find trends of medication reconciliation errors and adverse drug events within their business by collecting and analyzing data systematically.

 Healthcare professionals can assess the effectiveness of different strategies designed to reduce medication reconciliation errors by analyzing data from peer-reviewed journal articles, clinical practice guidelines, and systematic reviews (Killin et al., 2021). Combining these findings with clinical experience and patient preferences allows healthcare professionals to create evidence-based solutions that are customized to their circumstances.

The Iowa Model can help with the implementation of treatments like standardized medication reconciliation processes and electronic health record systems with decision support capabilities (Bachmeier, 2020). Continuous monitoring and evaluation of results enable healthcare organizations to assess the effectiveness of adopted measures in minimizing medication reconciliation errors and adverse drug events. This organized method enables healthcare organizations to successfully handle medication reconciliation errors and enhance patient safety outcomes, ensuring actions are based on the best available evidence and resulting in more efficient healthcare delivery.

Conclusion – NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources

Aside from that, the reliability of evidence and online resources is critical in determining the facts about heart disease. Healthcare professionals, who serve as patients’ care partners, can make informed decisions more effectively by using evidence-based practice models and the CRAAP criteria. The organization can use evidence-based treatments that have been customized to address the requirements of patients as individuals, as well as their surroundings. This strategy could serve to improve outcomes and ensure patient safety while dealing with cardiac disease.

References

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Manisha S., Parulekar MD, FACP, CMD, Christopher K. , & Rogers MPH. (2020, April). Polypharmacy – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. Www.sciencedirect.com. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/polypharmacy#:~:text=Care%20of%20the%20Geriatric%20Patient&text=Polypharmacy%2C%20the%20treatment%20with%20many

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Chang, T. I., Park, H., Kim, D. W., Jeon, E. K., Rhee, C. M., Kalantar-Zadeh, K., Kang, E. W., Kang, S.-W., & Han, S. H. (2020). Polypharmacy, hospitalization, and mortality risk: a nationwide cohort study. Scientific Reports, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75888-8

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Perreault, S., Schnitzer, M. E., Disso Eliane, Qazi, J., Laurie-Anne Boivin-Proulx, & Dorais, M. (2022). Polypharmacy and risk of mortality among patients with heart failure following hospitalization: a nested case–control study. Scientific Reports, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24285-4

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Khani, S., Rafiei, S., Ghashghaee, A., Masoumi, M., Srva Rezaee, Golnaz Kheradkhah, & Abdollahi, B. (2024). Cardiovascular risk factors among nurses: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 19(3), e0286245–e0286245. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286245

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: DeVore, A. D., Bosworth, H. B., & Granger, B. B. (2022). Improving implementation of evidence‐based therapies for heart failure. Clinical Cardiology, 45(S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23845

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Renirie, R. (2022, December 22). Research Guides: Website Research: CRAAP Test. Libguides.cmich.edu. https://libguides.cmich.edu/web_research/craap#:~:text=The%20test%20provides%20a%20list

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Tsao, C. W., Aday, A. W., Almarzooq, Z. I., Anderson, C. A. M., Arora, P., Avery, C. L., Baker-Smith, C. M., Beaton, A. Z., Boehme, A. K., Buxton, A. E., Commodore-Mensah, Y., Elkind, M. S. V., Evenson, K. R., Eze-Nliam, C., Fugar, S., Generoso, G., Heard, D. G., Hiremath, S., Ho, J. E., & Kalani, R. (2023). Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation, 147(8). https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.0000000000001123

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Ponikowski, P., Anker, S., Alhabib, K., Cowie, M., Force, T., Hu, S., Jaarsma, T., Krum, H., Rastogi, V., Rohde, L., Samal, U., Shimokawa, H., Siswanto, B., Sliwa, K., & Filippatos, G. (2021). World Heart Failure Alliance Global Heart Failure Awareness Programme Heart failure Preventing disease and death worldwide. https://www.escardio.org/static-file/Escardio/Subspecialty/HFA/WHFA-whitepaper-15-May-14.pdf

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Dusin, J., Melanson, A., & Mische-Lawson, L. (2023). Evidence-based Practice Models and Frameworks in the Healthcare setting: a Scoping Review. BMJ Open, 13(5), e071188. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071188

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Cullen, L., Hanrahan, K., Edmonds, S. W., Reisinger, H. S., & Wagner, M. (2022). Iowa implementation for sustainability framework. Implementation Science, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01157-5

NURS FPX 4030 Assessment 2 Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources: Killin, L., Hezam, A., Anderson, K. K., & Welk, B. (2021). Advanced medication reconciliation: A systematic review of the impact on medication errors and adverse drug events associated with transitions of care. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 47(7), 438–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2021.03.011
Bachmeier, S. (2020). Implementation of a Skilled Nursing Facility Readmissions Reduction Bundle. Thescholarship.ecu.edu, 10342/8662(10342/8662). https://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/10342/8662

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please Fill The Following to Resume Reading

    Please Enter Active Contact Information For OTP

    Verification is necessary to avoid bots.
    Please Fill The Following to Resume Reading

      Please Enter Active Contact Information For OTP

      Verification is necessary to avoid bots.
      Scroll to Top
      × How can I help you?