HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice  Assignment 2, 2017 Jenny Parratt Contents Learning outcomes for the unit ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 Assignment 2…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 Grading criteria for Assignment 2………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued)……………………………………………………………………………………………3 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued)……………………………………………………………………………………………4 Learning outcomes for the unit On completion of the unit students, should be able to: 1. examine the steps in evidence-based practice and the role that critical appraisal takes in informing decisions in health practice 2. frame relevant structured questions and identify the best evidence for answering those questions 3. identify and search the most appropriate data sources for evidence related to relevant structured questions 4. critically appraise appropriate evidence to answer relevant structured questions 5. use critical appraisals to consider implications for practice 6. plan a strategy to change healthcare practice based on results from critical appraisals. 2 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Assignment 2 Unit objectives assessed: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 Weight: 70% Length: 3500 words Due date Article: Thursday of Week 5 Due date Assignment: Friday of Week 7 Brief description: Critical appraisal of one item of SECONDARY evidence (a systematic review) and a plan for implementation NOTE: To obtain feedback about the suitability of your Systematic Review article from a learning facilitator please upload a pdf of the full article before 9am on Thursday of Week 5. The upload portal is called “Systematic Review article for Assignment 2” and will be located above the Turnitin portal where you will submit the actual assignment. If you miss this date, please ensure the article pdf is uploaded when you submit your assignment as grading cannot occur without it. This Assignment is to be submitted as a single document with two parts comprising: Part A, the detailed critical appraisal of a systematic review; and Part B, an implementation plan. A reference list must also be included. Your performance will be assessed according to the grading criteria (below and in the rubric). You should use these grading criteria as a guide for what to include in your assignment. Guidance for both parts of the assignment is available in the weekly content and activities accessed via the unit’s MySCU site. Part A of the assignment will consist of two sections: an Introduction (approx. 400 words) and the Critical appraisal (approx. 1100 words). Brevity is important in the Introduction: you are asked not to provide detail about evidencebased practice in general. Your critical appraisal should be guided by Activity 3.2; it should read like an essay that addresses each of the key grading criteria and not resemble a ‘checklist’. You may organise the appraisal in any way that you like, but please do not include a structured abstract in the appraisal. You are also advised to keep direct quotes to a minimum and instead paraphrase. Part B consists of a plan for the actual or hypothetical implementation of change in healthcare practice based on the evidence about your area of interest drawn from Assignment 1, or Part A of this assignment, or another area of need associated with your practice. Even if hypothetical, this plan must be realistic, evidence based, do-able and specific to a particular situation such as your workplace. A full implementation plan would ordinarily be an extensive document like a research proposal including methods to evaluate the successes of the implementation process. Your plan will be modest; it should comprise five main sections with each section approximately 400 words (see grading criteria). Grading criteria for Assignment 2 Grading Proportions (%) A: CRITICAL APPRAISAL, Evidence of the following: 1. INTRODUCTION to Appraisal, including: a) Question and brief rationale for question b) BRIEF outline of search (no tables) c) Rationale for chosen article d) Evidence that an appropriate appraisal tool has been chosen 5 (Continued over page) 3 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued) Grading Proportions (%) 2. Detailed CRITICAL APPRAISAL of systematic review that best answers your question, including: a) Critical appraisal of methodology i. Clarity/focus of research question ii. adequacy of the search process iii. issues of publication bias iv. inclusion/exclusion criteria v. method of appraisal vi. number of assessors vii. reproducibility of the method viii. risks of bias that may be incorporated into the review findings ix. ethical issues 12 b) Critical appraisal of results according to specific criteria for evidence type: i. decision to combine results and why, referring to  clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity of included studies, AND/OR  similarities/differences between included studies ii. how the study results were combined iii. presentation of data and statistical significance, e.g.:  forest plots, WMD, NNT, risk ratios, sub-group analysis, AND/OR  themes, lines of action iv. precision of results, e.g.:  evidence from forest plots such as confidence intervals, AND/OR  evidence of rigor, reflexivity, transparency, coherence, plausibility and/or credibility 12 c) Discussion of relevance of article regarding: i. its findings in general (clinical importance) ii. your original question asked in Introduction 10 d) Overall demonstration of understanding about theoretical concepts intrinsic to the type of research undertaken in the article being appraised (shown by appropriately referenced critique throughout the appraisal) 5 B: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, Evidence of the following: 3. INTRODUCTION to Plan, including: a) Overall statement of purpose b) Background situation statement outlining evidence supporting the change you wish to implement c) ONE (1) clear, specific objective d) A list of the target audience/s 10 (Continued over page) 4 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued) Grading Proportions (%) 4. GAP ANALYSIS that includes: a) Evidence-based demonstration of differences between current and proposed practices b) Discussion of key messages and/or recommendations arising from evidence justifying practice change 12 5. BARRIER ANALYSIS that includes: a) Identification of probable barriers and/or how they will be identified b) Discussion of barriers that need to be addressed to enable success of implementation. 12 6. Reference to CHANGE THEORY/S including: a) Outline of the chosen change theory/s including your implementation process/model/cycle. b) Definition of key constructs of each theory/process/model cycle c) Justification for choice of each theory/process/model cycle: i. suitability to context ii. evidence of prior use and effectiveness 12 7. EXAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY, specifically: a) Example educational material or survey/questionnaire designed to do ONE of: i. Inform the plan (e.g. a survey to inform the gap analysis and/or barrier analysis); OR ii. Implement the plan (e.g. education material); OR iii. Audit its progress (e.g. a survey of target audience/s) b) Justify choice of strategy relative to: i. Suitability for context ii. Suitability for at least one of the target audience groups iii. Fit with change theory/s and/or implementation process iv. Evidence of strategy’s prior use and effectiveness 10 C. Evidence of presentation skills  Clarity and brevity of expression  logical planning and sequence  no repetition  tables used appropriately, labelled and briefly referred to in-text; appendix not used  supporting documentation for arguments  acknowledgement of documentation using appropriate referencing convention  precise and accurate referencing (in-text & reference list) using correct reference style  use of non-sexist language  adherence to word limits  correct grammar, spelling and punctuation  definition of all abbreviations on first use  only well accepted acronyms are used eg WHO,NSW Health  no more than 2 new acronyms are introduced (up to 20% deducted) Total: 100%

HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice  Assignment 2, 2017 Jenny Parratt Contents Learning outcomes for the unit ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 Assignment 2…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 Grading criteria for Assignment 2………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued)……………………………………………………………………………………………3 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued)……………………………………………………………………………………………4 Learning outcomes for the unit On completion of the unit students, should be able to: 1. examine the steps in evidence-based practice and the role that critical appraisal takes in informing decisions in health practice 2. frame relevant structured questions and identify the best evidence for answering those questions 3. identify and search the most appropriate data sources for evidence related to relevant structured questions 4. critically appraise appropriate evidence to answer relevant structured questions 5. use critical appraisals to consider implications for practice 6. plan a strategy to change healthcare practice based on results from critical appraisals. 2 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Assignment 2 Unit objectives assessed: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 Weight: 70% Length: 3500 words Due date Article: Thursday of Week 5 Due date Assignment: Friday of Week 7 Brief description: Critical appraisal of one item of SECONDARY evidence (a systematic review) and a plan for implementation NOTE: To obtain feedback about the suitability of your Systematic Review article from a learning facilitator please upload a pdf of the full article before 9am on Thursday of Week 5. The upload portal is called “Systematic Review article for Assignment 2” and will be located above the Turnitin portal where you will submit the actual assignment. If you miss this date, please ensure the article pdf is uploaded when you submit your assignment as grading cannot occur without it. This Assignment is to be submitted as a single document with two parts comprising: Part A, the detailed critical appraisal of a systematic review; and Part B, an implementation plan. A reference list must also be included. Your performance will be assessed according to the grading criteria (below and in the rubric). You should use these grading criteria as a guide for what to include in your assignment. Guidance for both parts of the assignment is available in the weekly content and activities accessed via the unit’s MySCU site. Part A of the assignment will consist of two sections: an Introduction (approx. 400 words) and the Critical appraisal (approx. 1100 words). Brevity is important in the Introduction: you are asked not to provide detail about evidencebased practice in general. Your critical appraisal should be guided by Activity 3.2; it should read like an essay that addresses each of the key grading criteria and not resemble a ‘checklist’. You may organise the appraisal in any way that you like, but please do not include a structured abstract in the appraisal. You are also advised to keep direct quotes to a minimum and instead paraphrase. Part B consists of a plan for the actual or hypothetical implementation of change in healthcare practice based on the evidence about your area of interest drawn from Assignment 1, or Part A of this assignment, or another area of need associated with your practice. Even if hypothetical, this plan must be realistic, evidence based, do-able and specific to a particular situation such as your workplace. A full implementation plan would ordinarily be an extensive document like a research proposal including methods to evaluate the successes of the implementation process. Your plan will be modest; it should comprise five main sections with each section approximately 400 words (see grading criteria). Grading criteria for Assignment 2 Grading Proportions (%) A: CRITICAL APPRAISAL, Evidence of the following: 1. INTRODUCTION to Appraisal, including: a) Question and brief rationale for question b) BRIEF outline of search (no tables) c) Rationale for chosen article d) Evidence that an appropriate appraisal tool has been chosen 5 (Continued over page) 3 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued) Grading Proportions (%) 2. Detailed CRITICAL APPRAISAL of systematic review that best answers your question, including: a) Critical appraisal of methodology i. Clarity/focus of research question ii. adequacy of the search process iii. issues of publication bias iv. inclusion/exclusion criteria v. method of appraisal vi. number of assessors vii. reproducibility of the method viii. risks of bias that may be incorporated into the review findings ix. ethical issues 12 b) Critical appraisal of results according to specific criteria for evidence type: i. decision to combine results and why, referring to  clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity of included studies, AND/OR  similarities/differences between included studies ii. how the study results were combined iii. presentation of data and statistical significance, e.g.:  forest plots, WMD, NNT, risk ratios, sub-group analysis, AND/OR  themes, lines of action iv. precision of results, e.g.:  evidence from forest plots such as confidence intervals, AND/OR  evidence of rigor, reflexivity, transparency, coherence, plausibility and/or credibility 12 c) Discussion of relevance of article regarding: i. its findings in general (clinical importance) ii. your original question asked in Introduction 10 d) Overall demonstration of understanding about theoretical concepts intrinsic to the type of research undertaken in the article being appraised (shown by appropriately referenced critique throughout the appraisal) 5 B: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, Evidence of the following: 3. INTRODUCTION to Plan, including: a) Overall statement of purpose b) Background situation statement outlining evidence supporting the change you wish to implement c) ONE (1) clear, specific objective d) A list of the target audience/s 10 (Continued over page) 4 HLT91061 – Evidence Based Health Practice. Assignment 2, 2017 Grading criteria for Assignment 2 (continued) Grading Proportions (%) 4. GAP ANALYSIS that includes: a) Evidence-based demonstration of differences between current and proposed practices b) Discussion of key messages and/or recommendations arising from evidence justifying practice change 12 5. BARRIER ANALYSIS that includes: a) Identification of probable barriers and/or how they will be identified b) Discussion of barriers that need to be addressed to enable success of implementation. 12 6. Reference to CHANGE THEORY/S including: a) Outline of the chosen change theory/s including your implementation process/model/cycle. b) Definition of key constructs of each theory/process/model cycle c) Justification for choice of each theory/process/model cycle: i. suitability to context ii. evidence of prior use and effectiveness 12 7. EXAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY, specifically: a) Example educational material or survey/questionnaire designed to do ONE of: i. Inform the plan (e.g. a survey to inform the gap analysis and/or barrier analysis); OR ii. Implement the plan (e.g. education material); OR iii. Audit its progress (e.g. a survey of target audience/s) b) Justify choice of strategy relative to: i. Suitability for context ii. Suitability for at least one of the target audience groups iii. Fit with change theory/s and/or implementation process iv. Evidence of strategy’s prior use and effectiveness 10 C. Evidence of presentation skills  Clarity and brevity of expression  logical planning and sequence  no repetition  tables used appropriately, labelled and briefly referred to in-text; appendix not used  supporting documentation for arguments  acknowledgement of documentation using appropriate referencing convention  precise and accurate referencing (in-text & reference list) using correct reference style  use of non-sexist language  adherence to word limits  correct grammar, spelling and punctuation  definition of all abbreviations on first use  only well accepted acronyms are used eg WHO,NSW Health  no more than 2 new acronyms are introduced (up to 20% deducted) Total: 100%