Aap Report Sample

An annotated bibliography is a catalogue of citations to books, documents and articles with the purpose of the annotation being to inform the reader of the precision, relevance and quality of the sources cited (Davis, 2009). Evidence based practice enables health care professionals to effectively use current verification during the decision-making procedure (Sacket et al 2000). Healthcare professionals use a hierarchy of evidence as a guide to define the reliability and importance of the evidence based research; with the evidence that is founded further upon

Once an area of evidence-based practice has been chosen for investigation, the reviewer must locate current evidence sources and, using a structured approach, assess each for applicability to the issue being investigated. The aim of this paper is to use a Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklist (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011) to support these sources of evidence into a review that discusses the importance of daily, high-level, multidisciplinary communication and patient safety. The summaries of these evaluations will be provided as an appraisal of each study.

American Academy of Pediatrics and American Academy of Family Physicians article regarding acute otitis media is a filtered resource. It is an appropriate source for nursing practice because; it establishes clinical guidelines to diagnose and manage AOM. It also establishes guidelines when to treat the signs and symptoms of AOM, watchful waiting, or to treat with an antibiotic. This article is classified as an evidence based guideline because, it reviews multiple research literatures in a systemic manner and provides

This evidence meets the criteria for a filtered source. It was sourced online from the Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics and Family Physicians. Specialists from multi medical disciplines assembled to create an integrative systematic study and review of the current evidence- based literature available for the treatment and management of Acute Otitis Media (AOM). The conclusions and findings were utilized to devise guidelines and a practice protocol that recommended early diagnosis and makes

The article from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) that addresses acute otitis media (AOM) is a filtered resource. This article is appropriate for use in nursing practice as it establishes diagnosis and management guidelines for the treatment of AOM. In addition the article recommends treatment options for the symptoms of AOM and addresses the concept of watchful waiting. The is an evidence based guideline as it provides recommendations for practice and was created a systematic review and best clinical research in clinical literature. The Block article, Causative Pathogens,

Evidence-based practice is an approach used by health care professionals to continually use current best evidence-based research to make ethical and reliable decisions regarding patient care. “Research to promote evidence-based practice is becoming more and more a part of the regular work of health care leaders” (Grand Canyon University, 2015, p. 1). However, it is important to determine the difference between solid research and flawed research that provides unreliable inferences. Evidence-based research includes focusing on a clinical question; and includes the review and incorporation of several studies to strengthen the results of the new study (Grand Canyon University, 2015). Roddy et al. and Ganz et al. articles will be assessed to determine if the recommended changes were backed by solid research that warrants changes in a hospital.

Evaluation will be performed utilizing the Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklist for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (Slutsky, 2005) and use of the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NCG), guideline summary (2016).

Analyze and critically appraise evidence-based literature to support the solution to the identified problem. A minimum of (5) articles must be identified. This may include guidelines from the National Guideline Clearinghouse, Joanna Briggs Institute, or a review from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Review.

The current review was managed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher et al., 2009) and established guidelines for narrative synthesis by Popay et al. (2006).

It synthesizes the results of various primary studies by using strategies that reduces biases and random errors. These reviews follow a strict scientific design and provide consistent estimates about the effects of interventions, therefore, conclusions are defensible. Systematic reviews shows where knowledge is lacking and can be used to guide future research. These reviews are usually carried out in the areas of clinical tests such as diagnostic, screening and prognostic; public health interventions; economic evaluations; adverse effects and how and why interventions work. Cochrane reviews are systematic reviews undertaken by Cochrane Collaboration members, aims to help people to make well-informed decisions about healthcare by preparing, maintaining, and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of healthcare

Summaries – Evidence is taken from practice guidelines that were established by healthcare organizations and entered into the National Guidelines Clearinghouse databases. Summaries can be appraised rapidly because they are given a

There are some limitations to this literature review. One limitation is some of these studies may be outdated being that they are from the 1990s (i.e: Dulit et. al, 1990; Miller et. al, 1993; and Dougherty et. al, 1999). Another limitation is some of the studies were not randomized samples (i.e: Miller et. al, 1993 and Tragesser et. al, 2013). If samples are not random this could mean the results are bias.

While research has long paralleled medicine, the use of strong research evidence as the basis for clinical action is more recent (Houser, 2015). The historically accepted hierarchy of evidence separates evidence into levels of trust, from highest to lowest (Greenhalgh, 2010):

The AGREE II instrument which stands for the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation” was developed to analyse the variability, methodology and quality of guidelines, as well as what information and how information is reported within the guidelines. (Brouwers et al., 2010).

The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument is a tool that was developed to assess the rigor of development and transparency of clinical practice guidelines (AGREE, n.d.). Use of the AGREE tool, now improved to AGREE II, allows guideline users to have confidence in a guideline’s recommendations. The AGREE II instrument is categorized into 6 quality domains followed by an overall assessment and whether the appraiser would recommend the guideline.