In this two-part presentation assignment, you will describe a quality improvement initiative that is currently being monitored in your workplace.
Step 1 Research quality improvement initiatives in your workplace.
Research information about a quality improvement initiative in your workplace or in another clinical setting. Gather information about the initiative from individuals who actually collect and/or manage data for the initiative. If necessary, discuss with your nurse manager which initiatives are most important on your unit.
Step 2 Research quality improvement standards.
Using the Internet, review websites such as those for the Joint Commission or the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and gather information on the standard for the initiative.
Step 3 Create the second part of a 14- to 16-slide presentation.
Create your presentation by addressing the following points and make sure that you properly cite any resources used. Include a slide for each of the following:
- Title page
- Introduction
- Conclusion
- References
In addition to these four slides, each of the following bullet points should have its own slide. For Week 9, you answered questions 1 through 3(Please see below). You will answer questions 4 through 8 this week.
- Describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important.
- What evidence was used to determine that quality improvement was needed?
- Explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve.
- What national standards are being met by addressing the initiative?
- Which quality indicators will be used to measure the improvement in the initiative? Describe the quality indicators and how they support the initiative.
- Explain who collects the data and what is done with the data/how it is used/who uses it.
- Determine the agencies to which they report their information.
- Determine nursing’s involvement in helping with the initiative.
Step 4 Add presenter’s notes.
Include brief talking points as needed in the notes area for your slides. These notes should clarify/provide additional details about the information on the slides.
Step 5 Save and submit your assignment.
When you have completed your assignment, save a copy for yourself in an easily accessible place and submit a copy to your instructor.
Cite all sources in APA format.
See the rubric below for the grading details.
Rubric
NUR435 Week 10 Assignment Grading Rubric
NUR435 Week 10 Assignment Grading Rubric
CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Include the title slide
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Presentation includes appropriate title slide.
4 to >2.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Presentation includes appropriate title slide, but one detail may be missing.
2 to >1.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Presentation includes title slide, but student name or presentation title are missing.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
Does not include title slide.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Presentation includes an introduction and summary
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Introductory and summary slides include appropriate information.
4 to >2.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Introductory and summary slides included but could use more detail.
2 to >1.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Introductory and summary slides included but with inadequate information.
1 to >0 pts
Poor
One or both are missing or limited in development.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important
30 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
Clearly describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important.
22 to >10.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Somewhat describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. A few minor details may be missing.
10 to >3.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Minimally describes the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. Some major details are missing.
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Does not describe the quality improvement initiative and why it is important. OR is limited in development.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Identify the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed
30 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
Clearly identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed.
22 to >10.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Somewhat identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. A few minor details may be missing.
10 to >3.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Minimally identifies the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. Some major details are missing.
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Does not identify the evidence used to determine that quality improvement was needed. OR is limited in development.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve
30 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
Clearly explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve.
22 to >10.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Somewhat explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. A few minor details may be missing.
10 to >3.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Minimally explains what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. Some major details are missing
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Does not explain what goal the initiative is trying to achieve. OR is limited in development.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Mechanics and Grammar
10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
No errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, or spelling.
9 to >6.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Minor errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.
6 to >2.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Some errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Numerous errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling that interfere with reading/ understanding.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
APA Formatting
10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
No errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.
9 to >6.0 pts
Needs Some Improvement
Minor errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.
6 to >2.0 pts
Needs Significant Improvement
Some errors in APA format, in- text citation(s), or reference page.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Numerous errors in APA format, in-text citation(s), or reference page.
10 pts
Total Points: 120
Week 9 quality improvement topic:Central venous catheter site care for avoiding infections in cancer patients is the subject of a Cochrane Collaboration review. In order to avoid central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in cancer patients who need central venous catheters for chemotherapy, stem cell treatment, or long-term therapy, this systematic review assessed several dressing types and site care methods. Several randomized controlled studies comparing transparent dressings, gauze dressings, dressings impregnated with chlorhexidine, and different dressing change frequency were examined in this review. The results indicated that, in comparison to conventional dressings, chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings could lower catheter-related bloodstream infections, albeit the degree of certainty of the evidence differed throughout trials. The authors acknowledged the need for more high-quality research but came to the conclusion that infection prevention initiatives should concentrate on evidence-based catheter site care (Buetti et al., 2022).
My nursing practice is substantially supported by this findings, especially in cancer settings when patients are immunocompromised and more susceptible to infection. I have witnessed firsthand how terrible a CLABSI can be, frequently resulting in sepsis, treatment delays, and extended hospital stays, when caring for patients with central lines receiving chemotherapy and stem cell therapy. Strict sterile procedure, suitable dressing selection, and regular catheter site inspection are all emphasized in the Cochrane study (Rajandra et al., 2025). It verifies the routine dressing procedures and chlorhexidine-based treatments we employ to lower the risk of infection in susceptible individuals.
I could use this Cochrane study as evidence to support a quality improvement project if my present practice deviated from these guidelines, such as if chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings were not regularly utilized. The rationale for updating procedures, particularly in high-risk oncology groups, would be strengthened by presenting high-level systematic review results to leadership or an infection prevention committee. Using solid facts like this, as a nurse who has witnessed the clinical effects of bloodstream infections, aids in promoting safer, standardized care procedures that eventually enhance patient outcomes and lessen difficulties.