Week 1: Identification of Area of Interest

Week 1: Identification of Area of Interest

Week 1: Identification of Area of Interest

In examining the heart transplant population, we are looking at a relatively small percentage of the population.  For this reason, it would be difficult to proceed with significant quantitative research as the limited number of possible participants most likely does not allow for a large enough data set.  In general though, qualitative data seems to be a more appropriate type of research for the population.              Research for this population would include some demographic data, such as type of heart failure, age of onset, and race/ethnicity, but would have a great deal to do with the experiences of participants, such as their understanding of their disease and of the education they receive concerning the process before, during, and after transplant.  Research could also include the psychosocial aspects of the experience of the patients, which would be difficult to quantify in this type of population.  In my experience with the transplant population, a support system can impact transplant patients at every stage of the transplant process.  Though each patient’s process is incredibly personal and specific to them, there are generalized guidelines, results, and complications that occur relatively commonly and frequently, just as with all areas of medicine.

In NR 500 the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) interest that was chosen was research of healthcare interventions and how it can lower the rates of unplanned healthcare in the rural population.  The use of emergency and unplanned care in rural communities have long been increasing.  Unplanned care is defined as the use of healthcare to include all care sought without an advance appointment, such as visits to emergency rooms, unscheduled hospital admissions, and drop-in clinics (Brainard, et, al., 2016).  Patients in the rural areas seek unplanned healthcare due to their decreased involvement with health prevention programs, low socioeconomic statuses, decreased health education, delayed diagnosis of diseases, and decreased support from caregivers who assist with chronic illnesses (Brainard, et. al., 2016).

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS Week 1: Identification of Area of Interest:

Specialty Track and Evidence-Based Interest from NR500

The FNP specialty track will assist with obtaining advance knowledge that can be used to educate patients in the rural population about ways to improve their health. The quality of health in rural areas suffers due to the lack of exposure to proper healthcare, which includes health education, preventative programs, and confusion about the proper healthcare regimen (Brainard, et, al., 2016). This area of specialty will allow research of evidence-based practices that will be the driving force for many quality improvement initiatives, creation of standardized practices, and development of new or improved healthcare policies (Brainard, et. al, 2016).  Compared to the urban population, patients in the rural population seek care that is in the chronic states instead of the initial occurrence of symptoms.  This is due in part to their low socioeconomic status and less health education.  As a FNP who plans to provide care in rural areas, the opportunity to initiate care, education, and provide preventative measures is great.  Evidence-based information can be given to patients in the rural population in order to prevent unplanned healthcare.  The use of interventions to improve the populations’ health status can be the main focus of healthcare.  For example, the encouragement of self-care, compliance, symptom management, and the adoption of health related behaviors can be key to the prevention of unplanned healthcare.

NR500 Evidence-Based Interest

My area of EBP interest will remain the same.  As a FNP, the focus will be to utilize advance studies and guidelines into practice.  These interventions will decrease health disparities and reduce the incidence of unplanned healthcare for the rural population, along with the improvement of healthcare cost.  With the planned format of health education and preventative measures, patients can become more familiar with their required medical regimen, thus a reduction of unplanned healthcare can occur. 

Evidence-Based Interest Importance to Specialty Track

The research of EBP interest is of importance to the FNP specialty track because new approaches and interventions to reduce unplanned healthcare due to chronic disease and illnesses is needed.  The FNP specialty track will promote an advancement in advance knowledge, allowing the future FNP to use evidence- based practices to guide decisions in the practice setting.  As a FNP, advance knowledge can be used to create interventions that can introduce ways to improve health and ensure consistency in treatment within the rural communities.  For example, encouraging patients to use technology to gain increase education about diagnoses and interventions to prevent further health complications. The recipe for moving toward health in rural, underserved areas will need to include a focus of innovation and outcomes using evidence-based practice and technology (Brainard, et, al., 2016).  This will assist the rural communities with an improved state of health, decreasing mortality, morbidity, improving healthcare cost, and lowering the rates of unplanned healthcare.


In the rural population (P) does health education, early diagnosis, and health care programs (I) compared to deploying health resources geographically (C) reduce the incidence of unplanned healthcare (O)?


Brainard, J.S., Ford, J.A., Steel, N. & Jones, A.P. (2016).  A systemic review of health service interventions to reduce use of unplanned healthcare in rural areas.  Journal of Evaluations in Clinical practice, 22(2), 145-155.  doi: 10.111/jep.12470

In a quantitative study, standardized questionnaires or experiments are used to collect numeric data. “Quantitative research is conducted in a more structured environment that often allows for control over study variables, environment, and research questions. Quantitative research may be used to determine relationships between variables and outcomes” (Rutberg & Bouikidis, 2018). My research focus for this eight weeks is comparing two groups both with acute pain but one group would get narcotic medication while the other group would get non-narcotic medication. Then both groups would be evaluated and assessed an hour after the medication was given. The scenario describes a quantitative research project. There is a control group and an experimental group. For this project, it could go either way meaning either the non-narcotic group or the narcotic group could be either the control or experimental group. Though the feelings and thoughts of individuals with acute pain are important to the research, because they will be rating their pain afterwards, there are ways to measure pain levels. Often times, patients report a pain scale of 10/10 and all vitals are WNL, they are relaxed and no guarding or grimacing are present. In this case, what the person is saying and the physical observations and data do not correlate.

Thank you


Rutberg, S., & Bouikidis, C. D. (2018). Exploring the evidence. Focusing on the fundamentals: A simplistic differentiation between qualitative and quantitative research. Nephrology Nursing Journal45(2), 209-213