NUR435 Week 10 Assignment: Analyzing Quality Improvement Fin…

In this two-part presentation assignment, you will describe a quality improvement initiative that is currently being monitored in your workplace.

Step 1 Research quality improvement initiatives in your workplace.

Research information about a quality improvement initiative in your workplace or in another clinical setting. Gather information about the initiative from individuals who actually collect and/or manage data for the initiative. If necessary, discuss with your nurse manager which initiatives are most important on your unit.

Step 2 Research quality improvement standards.

Using the Internet, review websites such as those for the Joint Commission or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and gather information on the standard for the initiative.

Step 3 Create the second part of a 14- to 16-slide presentation.

Create your presentation by addressing the following points and make sure that you properly cite any resources used. Include a slide for each of the following:

• Title page
• Introduction
• Conclusion
• References

In addition to these four slides, each of the following bullet points should have its own slide. For Week 9, you answered questions 1 through 3(Please see below). You will answer questions 4 through 8 this week.

1. Describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important.
2. What evidence was used to determine that quality improvement was needed?
3. Explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve.
4. What national standards are being met by addressing the initiative?
5. Which quality indicators will be used to measure the improvement in the initiative? Describe the quality indicators and how they support the initiative.
6. Explain who collects the data and what is done with the data/how it is used/who uses it.
7. Determine the agencies to which they report their information.
8. Determine nursing’s involvement in helping with the initiative.

Step 4 Add presenter’s notes.

Include brief talking points as needed in the notes area for your slides. These notes should clarify/provide additional details about the information on the slides.

Step 5 Save and submit your assignment.

When you have completed your assignment, save a copy for yourself in an easily accessible place and submit a copy to your instructor.

Cite all sources in APA format.

See the rubric below for the grading details.

Rubric

NUR435 Week 10 Assignment Grading Rubric

NUR435 Week 10 Assignment Grading Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Include the title slide

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Presentation includes appropriate title slide.

4 to >2.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Presentation includes appropriate title slide, but one detail may be missing.

2 to >1.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Presentation includes title slide, but student name or presentation title are missing.

1 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not include title slide.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Presentation includes an introduction and summary

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Introductory and summary slides include appropriate information.

4 to >2.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Introductory and summary slides included but could use more detail.

2 to >1.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Introductory and summary slides included but with inadequate information.

1 to >0 pts

Poor

One or both are missing or limited in development.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important

30 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

Clearly describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important.

22 to >10.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Somewhat describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. A few minor details may be missing.

10 to >3.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Minimally describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. Some major details are missing.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. OR is limited in development.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Identify the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed

30 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

Clearly identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed.

22 to >10.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Somewhat identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. A few minor details may be missing.

10 to >3.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Minimally identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. Some major details are missing.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not identify the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. OR is limited in development.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve

30 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

Clearly explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve.

22 to >10.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Somewhat explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. A few minor details may be missing.

10 to >3.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Minimally explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. Some major details are missing

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. OR is limited in development.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Mechanics and Grammar

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, or spelling.

9 to >6.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Minor errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.

6 to >2.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Some errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

APA Formatting

10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.

9 to >6.0 pts

Needs Some Improvement

Minor errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.

6 to >2.0 pts

Needs Significant Improvement

Some errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in APA format, in-text citation(s), or reference page.

10 pts

Total Points: 120

Week 9 quality improvement topic:Central venous catheter site care for avoiding infections in cancer patients is the subject of a Cochrane Collaboration review. In order to avoid central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in cancer patients who need central venous catheters for chemotherapy, stem cell treatment, or long-term therapy, this systematic review assessed several dressing types and site care methods. Several randomized controlled studies comparing transparent dressings, gauze dressings, dressings impregnated with chlorhexidine, and different dressing change frequency were examined in this review. The results indicated that, in comparison to conventional dressings, chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings could lower catheter-related bloodstream infections, albeit the degree of certainty of the evidence differed throughout trials. The authors acknowledged the need for more high-quality research but came to the conclusion that infection prevention initiatives should concentrate on evidence-based catheter site care (Buetti et al., 2022).

My nursing practice is substantially supported by this findings, especially in cancer settings when patients are immunocompromised and more susceptible to infection. I have witnessed firsthand how terrible a CLABSI can be, frequently resulting in sepsis, treatment delays, and extended hospital stays, when caring for patients with central lines receiving chemotherapy and stem cell therapy. Strict sterile procedure, suitable dressing selection, and regular catheter site inspection are all emphasized in the Cochrane study (Rajandra et al., 2025). It verifies the routine dressing procedures and chlorhexidine-based treatments we employ to lower the risk of infection in susceptible individuals.

I could use this Cochrane study as evidence to support a quality improvement project if my present practice deviated from these guidelines, such as if chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings were not regularly utilized. The rationale for updating procedures, particularly in high-risk oncology groups, would be strengthened by presenting high-level systematic review results to leadership or an infection prevention committee. Using solid facts like this, as a nurse who has witnessed the clinical effects of bloodstream infections, aids in promoting safer, standardized care procedures that eventually enhance patient outcomes and lessen difficulties.