Appendix for evidenced-based practice proposal
Methods for adapting in evidenced-based practice within the hospital setting
In any evidenced-based practice, there must be varied opinions concerning the options to carry out the practices. Some caregivers would highly prefer the method that would be highly recommended, the technological method. In contrast, others may prefer face-to-face practice as they highly interact with the patient (Mikhael et al., 2019). They also know the methods and ways they would prefer their treatment given instead of taking a presumed practice. In the proposal, the caregivers will have to adopt an education and sensitization method, to have both patients and their parents aware of type-2 diabetes (Mikhael et al., 2019). This will also include various other means, as all people cannot effectively adapt to the technological method of education and sensitization.
The face to face method adopted by some caregivers will have challenges for some patients who will require commuting to reach the healthcare facilities (Mikhael et al., 2019). However, both methods have been noted to offer almost the same results under a questionnaire effectively. The questions asked to the respondents, who are mostly the patients and their parents include:
- How effectively can you respond to an educational program offered through the tablet or phone?
- Do you own a phone or a computer for use at home?
- How do you regularly keep time for exercising while at home alone and with friends?
For the parents, various questions were used to check the effectiveness of face-to-face educational and sensitization methods.
- How often do you respond to calls from any healthcare profession?
- How long have you been monitoring your child’s nutritional intake?
- How often do you take your children for exercise?
- Regarding the technological method of education and sensitization, how often would you respond to the procedure?
- How much time do you spend on monitoring your children’s dietary intake?
- As a parent, how concerned are you with your children’s well-being?
- Have you ever considered an occasional clinical visit with your children for a general health check-up?
- Do you discourage our children from the consumption of excessive junk foods?
- What information do you have that regards nutritional value for diabetic patients?
Regarding this questionnaire, the results obtained showed that most parents were comfortable with their children being on either side of the program. However, most of them had controversies with the technological method of education and sensitization. They defied the technique as it was to be issued through a phase to phase way, where most of the children and adolescents were unaware. There were compromises on the issue with the reminders on when the program started and how the patients will be kept aware of its working. Further claims stated that parents had to keep alert of the timed program, as most children could be out playing or doing other activities.
Thus, the face-to-face model of education and sensitization was considered necessary (Mikhael et al., 2019). Since not all people will consider the program in online delivery, there was a need to begin a face-to-face program with patients and parents visiting at their pleasure within the designated time. The program will be done in a three-day weekly manner, where patients will attend for the three days at any time (Mikhael et al., 2019). Their choice of time will vary, depending on their age. Parents were also scheduled to have a one-on-one program that evaluates their responsibilities to monitor their children’s health progress. This will further be followed by a nutritionist education concerning the feeding habits of the patients. The nutritionists stated a huge responsibility burdened on the patients’ parents regarding their condition, and they had to monitor the food intake for them effectively.
Patients face-to-face attendance schedule
Approaches used for education and sensitization for both caregivers and clinicians
The SHARE approaches
this approach was used to train the clinicians on the best ways to arrive at decisions that link to the patient’s care provision (Martin, 2019). This training would also help healthcare professionals actively engage the patients in making decisions that regard their health (Martin, 2019). The approach uses various questions that assess the readiness of the patients n participating in the education program and their understanding of their health.
SHARE approach tools.
The various tools used in this approach are meant to effectively ensure that all participants are aware of the health implications of the patients (Martin, 2019). The tools include reference guides, posters, and other resources that effectively provide progress and understanding of the patients’ healthcare providers and their active participation in the educational program.
The tools include a step by step guide on implementing the SHARE approach with the patients. Also, they contain communication strategies for various patients (Martin, 2019). The latter may have different cultural backgrounds implying that their context will be varied and that their practices will have to be embedded accordingly depending on how the healthcare professionals will consider viable .the teach-back technique was also used to monitor the communication skills for the patients to enhance their decision making (Jia et al.,2019). There would also be a brief to the administrators on the effectiveness of the shared approach in decision making.
In consideration of the SHARE approach, various steps will be taken to effectively keep the shared decision-making procedure (Jia et al.,2019). The first step will involve seeking patient participation. Second is helping the patient check and compare the treatment options that could favor them (Martin, 2019). In the treatment, the various options will be available and administered according to the patients’ preferences (Jia et al.,2019). This will be done immediately after being sensitized on their adherence to treatment and nutritional adherence (Martin, 2019). The preferences will be considered in the third step, where the healthcare professional will be required to assess the patients’ value and choice.
After the preference and value assessment, the professionals will reach a conclusive decision with the patient on their treatment that is to be administered later on (Martin, 2019). However, some patients may have preferences that could be misleading and may, therefore, require evaluating their effectiveness towards achieving a common goal. The reference should have positive health benefits (Martin, 2019). In case the preferences have an overall negative impact. They will be explained and made to understand the reason for the healthcare professionals’ decision. However, various options may be explained to help them understand their expected outcomes.
Jia, X., Yang, Y., Chen, Y., Xia, Z., Zhang, W., Feng, Y., … & Deng, H. (2019). Multivariate analysis of genome-wide data to identify potential pleiotropic genes for type 2 diabetes, obesity and coronary artery disease using metacca. International Journal of Cardiology, 283, 144-150.
Martin, F. R. (2019). A Shared Medical Appointment: An Innovative Approach to Individualized Care for Type-2 Diabetics (Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University).
Mikhael, E. M., Hassali, M. A., Hussain, S. A., & Shawky, N. (2019). Self-management knowledge and practice of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Baghdad, Iraq: a qualitative study. Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy, 12, 1.