The translation of evidence into practice is an essential element in healthcare. The rationale for the translation is that clinical research is not undertaken merely for the sake of it; instead, it should have practical implications. Therefore, the translation of evidence acts as a bridge between the theoretical and practical aspects of research. However, the translation process needs to be objective and structured to have a positive contribution to nursing practice. Accordingly, multiple translational theories exist. The Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) is one such conceptual framework. This essay will serve as the basis for evaluating the proposed solution for the growing prevalence of diabetes in the local setting.
The Iowa model of evidence is a standard and effective translation model. The University of Iowa developed it in the 1990s. However, it has undergone some revisions to ensure that it is consistent with emerging issues in research and practice. According to Lloyd et al. (2016), it consists of numerous components. The first component is the identification of a trigger for the proposed evidence-based practice. Essentially, one must determine whether the need for the assessment arises because of a practice- or knowledge focus. For this evaluation, the trigger is a practice issue caused by the rising cases of diabetes. The second component entails assessing whether it is a priority. Diabetes is a priority in the local setting because its growing prevalence has led to straining the locally available healthcare resources. This situation is made worse because of the tendency for the disease to occur with others. Additionally, the potential for the ailment to present a more significant healthcare crisis in the area is high because of the large proportion of the community with pre-diabetes.
The third step entails the selection of a team to develop, evaluate, and implement the proposed EBP. Critically, Lloyd et al. (2016) argue that the team should constitute a broad cross-section of the stakeholders to ensure that the results are highly representative. The fourth step involves the gathering and analysis of research. Lloyd et al. (2016) recommend using structured means to evaluate research; hence, tools like the PICOT framework are essential. The fifth component is criticizing the research. It leads to the subsequent step where one ought to stop and decide if the research is sufficient to address the practice problem. If it is not, then additional gathering and critiquing of research is necessary. If it is adequate, then the next step involves undertaking a pilot program for the intervention. This strategy is useful because it offers one a chance to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention, and to determine whether areas of improvement exist. Once the pilot program occurs, and the necessary corrections and improvements are undertaken, the full-scale EBP intervention can take place.
The proposed intervention entails creating awareness of diabetes self-management approaches. Based on the Iowa model, it is possible to foresee potential barriers. They include the need to conduct exploratory research to gauge the level of priority for the intervention within the local setting. Such a step is time-consuming and requires resources. The challenges can be addressed through the collaboration of all the stakeholders. Such a partnership would offer the basis for sharing of the resources needed; thus, lowering the strain on the stakeholders. The stakeholders involved include local practitioners, healthcare officials, nurses, and community organizations that offer support to those affected by the disease.
Reference
Lloyd, S., D’Errico, E., & Bristol, S. (2016). Use of the Iowa Model of Research in Practice as a Curriculum Framework for Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) Project Completion. Nursing Education Perspectives, 37(1), 51-53.