education handouts decrease
Respond
As a reminder to those who may have not read my posts in the past six weeks, my PICOT question is: In patients with CHF, would a scheduled education program with booklet versus just education handouts decrease 30 day hospital admissions over a 3 month period?” Heart failure readmission rates cause the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services to now give hefty penalties to organizations within thirty days so there is currently a tremendous amount of research surrounding this topic. There are two major research studies that really follow the PET model that I am aiming for with this study. My goal is to have approximately 60 test subjects from my primary care practice who fall within the categories of having a low ejection fraction, diagnosed with heart failure, and who do not have severe comorbidities including other systems. I will split this group into a control group and an intervention group. The control group will receive a three-month educational program and booklet while the other will receive the standardized care that has been used in the office.
The PDSA model was created by Edward Deming and is a great way to implement change and improve quality of care. The PDSA stands for Plan, Do, Act, and Study (Donnelly & Kirk, 2015). The key through the literature research review was that patients’ who had better education about their disease process, diet, exercise, lifestyle modifications, medications, and treatment plan, ultimately had better outcomes than those who are simply receiving the standardized care. Through review of quantitative and qualitative research literature, it was evident that the influence and key tools to self-management precluded better patient outcomes, lower readmission rates, decrease in length of stay in the hospital, and improved quality of life. Using the PDSA model, I will outline my plan and figure out the ultimate goal of this process. This PICOT question would require planning who will be doing the education session, who will create the booklet, how we will fund this project, and how to select as well as the selection process for our test subjects (as well as informed consent). This also includes the approval of an ethics committee for this research in order to protect the test subjects. The “Do” would be to start the research program by following the two groups and providing the education and reference channels to the patients as see fit. It is important to document throughout the course of this research in order to gain the most information possible. The “Study” would be at the conclusion of the three-month period when all the finalized data is collected and analyzed. This is where the researcher would see if their predicaments were correct and how they related to the research literature. The final step is “Act” and this will involve assessing the overall cycle and looking where to make changes to being the next PDSA cycle. In a world of health care where it is constantly changing and evolving, it is important that processes are being assessed in order to change and improve. Following the three-month process of education, intervention, and data collection, it is really important to focus on what worked during the process, what didn’t, and what changes can be made to reach the goal of healthier and happier patients.
One article I found had a very similar PICOT and used a PET method that seemed very relevant to my PDSA. It used a similar number of subjects and also slipt them into groups over a three month period. It had very positive results in a sense that the patients who were in the intervention group were very satisfied with their quality of life and managed to stay out of the hospital. As nurses and a future nurse practitioner, isn’t that what our goal of all this EBP is for – to improve patient outcomes? I think to truly take my study one step further would be to also perform a qualitative study and take a closer look at their perception of the education, self-management, and possibly ways to improve my program.
Alireza, A., Tahereh, N., & Mansoureh, A. (2018). Effect of the self-management education program on the quality of life in people with chronic heart failure: A randomized controlled trial. Electronic Physician, 10(7), 7028-7037. doi:10.19082/7028
