NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

ByDaniel Rossi Updated on

NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion – Step-by-Step Guide With Example Solution

The first step before starting to write the NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion is to understand the requirements of the assignment. The first step is to read the assignment prompt carefully to identify the topic, the length and format requirements. You should go through the rubric provided so that you can understand what is needed to score the maximum points for each part of the assignment. 

It is also important to identify the paper’s audience and purpose, as this will help you determine the tone and style to use throughout. You can then create a timeline to help you complete each stage of the paper, such as conducting research, writing the paper, and revising it to avoid last-minute stress before the deadline. After identifying the formatting style to be applied to the paper, such as APA, review its use, including writing citations and referencing the resources used. You should also review the formatting requirements for the title page and headings in the paper, as outlined by Chamberlain University.

How to Research and Prepare for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

The next step in preparing for your paper is to conduct research and identify the best sources to use to support your arguments. Identify a list of keywords related to your topic using various combinations. The first step is to visit the Chamberlain University library and search through its database using the important keywords related to your topic. You can also find books, peer-reviewed articles, and credible sources for your topic from the Chamberlain University Library, PubMed, JSTOR, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, and Google Scholar. Ensure that you select the references that have been published in the last 5 years and go through each to check for credibility. Ensure that you obtain the references in the required format, such as APA, so that you can save time when creating the final reference list. 

You can also group the references according to their themes that align with the outline of the paper. Go through each reference for its content and summarize the key concepts, arguments and findings for each source. You can write down your reflections on how each reference connects to the topic you are researching. After the above steps, you can develop a strong thesis that is clear, concise and arguable. Next, create a detailed outline of the paper to help you develop headings and subheadings for the content. Ensure that you plan what point will go into each paragraph.

How to Write the Introduction for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

The introduction of the paper is the most crucial part, as it helps provide the context of your work and determines whether the reader will be interested in reading through to the end. Begin with a hook, which will help capture the reader’s attention. You should contextualize the topic by offering the reader a concise overview of the topic you are writing about so that they may understand its importance. You should state what you aim to achieve with the paper. The last part of the introduction should be your thesis statement, which provides the main argument of the paper.

How to Write the Body for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

The body of the paper helps you to present your arguments and evidence to support your claims. You can use headings and subheadings developed in the paper’s outline to guide you on how to organize the body. Start each paragraph with a topic sentence to help the reader know what point you will be discussing in that paragraph. Support your claims using the evidence collected from the research, and ensure that you cite each source properly using in-text citations. You should analyze the evidence presented and explain its significance, as well as how it relates to the thesis statement. You should maintain a logical flow between paragraphs by using transition words and a flow of ideas.

How to Write the In-text Citations for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

In-text citations help readers give credit to the authors of the references they have used in their work. All ideas that have been borrowed from references, any statistics and direct quotes must be referenced properly. The name and date of publication of the paper should be included when writing an in-text citation. For example, in APA, after stating the information, you can put an in-text citation after the end of the sentence, such as (Smith, 2021). If you are quoting directly from a source, include the page number in the citation, for example (Smith, 2021, p. 15). Remember to also include a corresponding reference list at the end of your paper that provides full details of each source cited in your text. An example paragraph highlighting the use of in-text citations is as below:

“The integration of technology in nursing practice has significantly transformed patient care and improved health outcomes. According to Morelli et al. (2024), the use of electronic health records (EHRs) has streamlined communication among healthcare providers, allowing for more coordinated and efficient care delivery. Furthermore, Alawiye (2024) highlights that telehealth services have expanded access to care, particularly for patients in rural areas, thereby reducing barriers to treatment.”

How to Write the Conclusion for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

When writing the conclusion of the paper, start by restating your thesis, which helps remind the reader what your paper is about. Summarize the key points of the paper by restating them. Discuss the implications of your findings and your arguments. Conclude with a call to action that leaves a lasting impression on the reader or offers recommendations.

How to Format the Reference List for NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion

The reference helps provide the reader with the complete details of the sources you cited in the paper. The reference list should start with the title “References” on a new page. It should be aligned center and bolded. The references should be organized in an ascending order alphabetically, and each should have a hanging indent. If a source has no author, it should be alphabetized by the title of the work, ignoring any initial articles such as “A,” “An,” or “The.” If you have multiple works by the same author, list them in chronological order, starting with the earliest publication. 

Each reference entry should include specific elements depending on the type of source. For books, include the author’s last name, first initial, publication year in parentheses, the title of the book in italics, the edition (if applicable), and the publisher’s name. For journal articles, include the author’s last name, first initial, publication year in parentheses, the title of the article (not italicized), the title of the journal in italics, the volume number in italics, the issue number in parentheses (if applicable), and the page range of the article. For online sources, include the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) or the URL at the end of the reference. An example reference list is as follows:

References

Morelli, S., Daniele, C., D’Avenio, G., Grigioni, M., & Giansanti, D. (2024). Optimizing telehealth: Leveraging Key Performance Indicators for enhanced telehealth and digital healthcare outcomes (Telemechron Study). Healthcare, 12(13), 1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12131319

Alawiye, T. (2024). The impact of digital technology on healthcare delivery and patient outcomes. E-Health Telecommunication Systems and Networks, 13, 13-22. 10.4236/etsn.2024.132002.

NR 717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion Instructions

Purpose

The purpose of this discussion is to demonstrate your understanding of interventions to address population health problems and reduce health disparities. Have a look at NR717 Week 4 Discussion | Evaluation Processes in Population Health.

Instructions

Using your selected population, continue your search and appraisal of evidence by analyzing one research study that offers a potential intervention to address your selected population health issue. This intervention must be at the population level. This research study must be new, one that was not used in a previous course.

Appraise a quantitative research study that utilizes an intervention to address the selected health issue identified in Week 2 using the Johns Hopkins Research Appraisal Tool.

  • Link (Word doc): Johns Hopkins Research Appraisal Tool.

Transfer your findings to the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool.

  • Link (Word doc): Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool.

Analyze the evidence summary tool of the research study to address the following in the discussion:

  1. Determine whether the intervention has the potential to impact the issue. Explain your rationale.
  2. Attach the completed Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool.
  3. Present the translation science model that would best aid the success of this intervention and discuss how the stakeholders are integrated into the design of the theory or model.
  4. Identify where your selected intervention is located on the Minnesota Public Health Wheel.

Please click on the following link to review the DNP Discussion Guidelines on the Student Resource Center program page:

  • Link (webpage): DNP Discussion Guidelines.

Program Competencies

This discussion enables the student to meet the following program competencies:

  1. Translates a synthesis of research and population data to support preventative care and improve the nation’s health. (PO 1)
  1. Leads others in professional identity, advanced clinical judgment, systems thinking, resilience, and accountability in selecting, implementing, and evaluating clinical care. (PO 1)

Course Outcomes

This discussion enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

  1. Assimilate epidemiology principles and interventions to impact the social determinants of health, Global Burden of Disease, and population health outcomes. (PCs 7, 8; PO 1)
  1. Formulate strategies for providing culturally relevant and high-quality healthcare to vulnerable and high-risk populations to address social injustice and health inequities. (PCs 7, 8; PO 1)

NR717 Week 3 Population Health Interventions Discussion Example

Population Health Interventions

Determine whether the intervention has the potential to impact the issue. Explain your rationale

Blumenthal et al. (2022) sought to find if lifestyle modifications among individuals who suffered from hypertension would help to control blood pressure effectively. Significant decreases in the clinic blood pressure and improvements in biomarkers of cardiovascular disease are seen after 4 months of a planned physical exercise and nutrition program as supplementary therapy provided in a rehabilitation center. Therefore, this intervention showed a positive outcome in the health of the individuals. Lifestyle modifications such as engaging in exercise, quitting drinking and smoking, and eating a healthy diet are effective strategies to combat hypertension and heart diseases among persons facing disparities of health (Oliveros et al., 2019). They help to keep the body weight in check, thus preventing obesity which has been implicated as the leading risk factor for developing these problems.

Present the translation science model that would best aid the success of this intervention and discuss how the stakeholders are integrated into the design of the theory or model

The translation science models increase the adoption and utilization of credible evidence to enhance patients’ health outcomes and the overall health of the community (Lee & Ho, 2019). The models provide clarification of the techniques involved in the execution of an approach focusing on evidence-based practice. The Knowledge to Action (KTA) framework was chosen as the choice model. The healthcare industry employs the framework to help various departments to use the research findings. Knowledge generation and implementation are the two pillars of the KTA methodology. Inquiry into a topic, synthesis of that topic, and the use of appropriate knowledge tools all contribute to the development of better interpretation (Lee & Ho, 2019). Taking action requires recognizing the issue at hand and evaluating it in light of the existing literature. Successes and challenges are also highlighted in this process.

Identify where your selected intervention is located on the Minnesota Public Health Wheel.

Undertaking lifestyle modifications fall under the blue wheel. The individuals are taught about the importance of lifestyle modifications and how to go about them. This intervention is individual and community focused. Embracing self-care management is championed by this chosen intervention.

References

Blumenthal, A., Hinderliter, L., Smith, J., Mabe, S., Watkins, L., Craighead, L., Ingle, K., Tyson, C., Lin, H., Kraus, E., Liao, L., & Sherwood, A. (2021). Effects of lifestyle modification on patients with resistant hypertension: Results of the TRIUMPH randomized clinical trial. Circulation, 144(15), 1212–1226. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.121.055329

Lee, C., & K. (2019). Knowledge to action framework for home health monitoring. Healthcare Management Forum, 32(4), 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0840470419855364

Oliveros, E., Patel, H., Kyung, S., Fugar, S., Goldberg, A., Madan, N., & Williams, A. (2019). Hypertension in older adults: Assessment, management, and challenges. Clinical Cardiology, 43(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23303

Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool

Practice Question: Can lifestyle modifications help to manage resistant hypertension?

Date:

 Article Number   Author and Date   Evidence Type  Sample, Sample Size, Setting Findings That Help Answer the EBP Question  Observable Measures   Limitations  Evidence Level, Quality
1  (Blumenthal et al., 2021)Lifestyle Modification for Resistant Hypertension: The TRIUMPH Randomized Clinical Trial Quantitative, Observational One hundred forty patients suffering from resistant hypertension who were willing to engage in the study were included. They had a mean age of 63 years, with 48% being females, 31% suffering from diabetes, 59% being black, and 21% battling chronic diseases. Only individuals diagnosed with resistant hypertension in the preceding six months of the study were included. Additionally, persons who had received treatment for two or more weeks and who were on three or more antihypertensives from different classes were included, A random assignment to a four-month Center-Based Lifestyle interventional program included dietary education, weight management, and exercise or a one-time counseling session that provided them with Standardized Education and Physical advice.The TRIUMPH, a randomized clinical trial, was used to evaluate whether the interventions mentioned above could help lower the participants’ blood pressure. 

 

❑ N/A

 Patients with resistant hypertension can benefit from reducing their blood pressure through dietary and physical activity changes. Significant decreases in the clinic and ambulatory blood pressure and improvements in chosen biomarkers of cardiovascular disease are seen after four months of a planned exercise and diet program administered as supplementary therapy in a cardiac rehabilitation environment. The purpose of the TRIUMPH research is to assess the effectiveness of center-based lifestyle interventions such as s engagement in physical activity to that of standard education and physician advice (SEPA) in treating patients with resistant hypertension. Participants (n = 150) will be randomly assigned to participate in a standardized behavioral counseling session simulating real-world medical service or a supervised lifestyle modification administered in a cardiac rehabilitation clinic over the course of 4 months. Clinical blood pressure is the primary endpoint; ambulatory blood pressure and various cardiovascular disease biomarkers, such as arterial stiffness, left ventricular hypertrophy,  insulin resistance, lipids, inflammatory markers, and baroreceptor reflex sensitivity, are secondary endpoints. At the 1-year follow-up, it will assess modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease such as smoking status, blood pressure, and diet. Since the study was conducted in a single site, the generalizability of its findings may raise concerns. Evidence Level I – RCT
   ❑ N/A
   ❑ N/A
   ❑ N/A
   ❑ N/A
   ❑ N/A
   ❑ N/A

Attach a reference list with full citations of articles reviewed for this Practice question.