Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, presents complex challenges in clinical management. An evidence-based practice (EBP) framework is crucial for providing quality patient care and positive patient outcomes in these dire challenges. This paper will focus on the evaluation of using research-based evidence for nursing decisions, and EBP principles will be applied to patients’ care with AMI. This section will address the reliability of resources, assess important literature and web-based information and identify a model of best pending practice (EBP) to integrate into AMI care. Baccalaureate-educated nurses play a significant part in this endeavor, as they act as the link between research and bedside practice, furnishing healthcare professionals with the most recent and reliable set of evidence available to guide patient care. Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
Chosen Diagnosis: Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI)
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI), also known as heart attack, is a lethal condition caused by the sudden blockage of blood flowing to a part of the heart, which eventually results in cardiac tissue damage (Sachdeva et al., 2023). The worldwide contribution of AMI to cardiovascular disease is enormous, being the leading cause of death and disability. Globally, the condition is affecting an approximately 3 million population, resulting in about 1 million deaths in the US every single year (Mechanic et al., 2023). Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a medical condition caused by the complete blockage of an artery supplying the blood to the heart muscle. The systolic and diastolic function can be affected by MI, which results in a high arrhythmias risk. The condition calls for a fast and correct mode of treatment delivery to reverse coronary circulation, reduce heart damage, and even increase survival rates.
PLACE YOUR ORDER HERE NOW
The complexity of AMI management, from immediate medication interventions to long-term lifestyle choices, calls for an evidence-based approach. Such an approach provides the framework for orienting professional practice towards the best and newest information available, leading to better treatment. Owing to the fast-paced evolution of medical research, it is essential to consistently keep up-to-date with the most recent and robust evidence, which can be used to devise effective post-AMI management plans that can significantly reduce the mortality rates and improve the quality of life (Zhou et al., 2021). The implementation of evidence-based strategies in the attention of AMI patients is not only the following of clinical rules and regimens but also taking into consideration patient-specific needs and preferences. The process is not confined to the initial medical management but also comprises patient education concerning risk factors abatement, rehabilitation programs and psychosocial support, which are rooted in current research. Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
Criteria for Determining Credibility of Resources
Evaluating a wide range of medical literature and online sources for evidence-based practice, particularly in the field of AMI, requires applying stringent criteria to determine the validity and use of information. The following delineated criteria are pivotal when appraising the value of journal articles and web resources:
- Peer-Reviewed Status: Only credible sources should be used, whether they are from peer-reviewed journals or internet databases, as they have been scrutinized by professionals in the subject matter before publication in that year (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2023).
- Authorship and Credentials: The authors’ credentials and scholarly level of research provide a close view of the depth of knowledge and standards behind the research. The formation of multidisciplinary (i.e., cardiologists, researchers, academicians) teams usually guarantees a comprehensive approach to the theme (Gulati et al., 2021).
- Evidence Hierarchy: Place the resource in the evidence hierarchy, where works like randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are ranked at the top for their high level of rigor and reduced bias (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2023).
- Recency and Relevance: The resource must be new – best if within the past five years – to ensure current knowledge applies to the latest practice.
- Publisher Reputation: The reference to reputable and widely accepted medical organizations and institutions, such as the American Heart Association, known for publishing guidelines and research demonstrating rigorous and evidence-based principles (Gulati et al., 2021), is among these factors. Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
- Research Funding and Conflicts of Interest: The funding source and potential conflicts of interest related to the conducted study should be made public under certain circumstances to avoid the possibility of the research study being biased (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2023).
- Citation Metrics: The number of times other experts cite a particular source can reflect this source’s influence and perception within the scientific community (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2023).
Adhering strictly to the reviewed criteria means that the evidence from AMI care is reliable and widely applied, which underscores the quality of interventions and patient outcomes.
Analysis of Credibility and Relevance of Evidence
The credibility and relevance of evidence are paramount when selecting resources to address AMI. Through a meticulous review process, the resources previously identified provide comprehensive and up-to-date information that is essential for the management of this condition:
- CINAHL: This section expresses nursing-focused interventions for AMI, which are very important for bedside decision-making. Moreover, the data here are based on peer-reviewed sources on the website to ensure high standards of research quality. Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
- PubMed: This source takes a comprehensive approach to AMI, for instance, providing updated treatment methods, which is beneficial for maintaining current knowledge on care management.
- American Heart Association (AHA): The AHA website (American Heart Association) is a major source of clinical guidelines for treating AMI patients. It gives tools that have been critically evaluated by experts and presents information that is in tandem with time and verified; thus, the information sources are highly reliable.
- Cochrane Library: The systematic reviews it conducts present evidence that is recognized as the top level of the overture hierarchy of therapies, including those applicable to AMI.
The reliability of each source is assessed on its authority, timeliness, and contribution to the evidence base in cardiovascular care, thereby ensuring that the most important and credible information is used to improve AMI outcomes.
Evidence-Based Practice Model Selection
The Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model (JHNEBP) is ideal for actuating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) because of its heuristic and amenable structure that integrates data into clinical proceedings. The model’s PET structure (Practice, Evidence, Translation) encourages a focused approach to EBP. It starts with a clearly defined clinical question and evolves through the evidence collection and implementation processes (Johns Hopkins Medicine, 2022). For AMI, this guarantees that the most recent research, such as randomized control trials and guidelines from authoritative sources like the American Heart Association, is the foundation of patient care at every point. Implementing this model allows the nurses to climb up the hierarchy of evidence by using a tiered system to incorporate into the most robust and most recent reports, adapting patient care and alignment with recent standards of care. The JHNEBP model stresses the importance of evidence quality, which empowers nurses to apply validated research to the intervention that is effective for AMI patients. Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
Conclusion
Using Evidence-Based Practice in managing Acute Myocardial Infarction is fundamental to providing the best possible, patient-oriented care. The paper has provided an overview of the sources and types of reliable evidence and the selection and application of the same evidence, based on the guidance of the Johns Hopkins Nursing EBP Model, to make informed decisions and promote interventions for AMI. Nurses must follow EBP and integrate validated research to use the best practices, bringing about the most desirable patient outcomes, thus advancing nursing practice. The seamless integration of best practice guidelines in AMI care conveys the AMI nurses’ commitment to quality and continual strive for knowledge in nursing.
References
Johns Hopkins Medicine. (2022). Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model. Www.hopkinsmedicine.org. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/model-tools
Mechanic, O. J., Grossman, S. A., & Gavin, M. (2023, September 3). Acute myocardial infarction. National Library of Medicine; StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459269/
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2023). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice. In Amazon (Fifth, North American edition). LWW. https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-Based-Practice-Nursing-Healthcare-Guide/dp/1975185722
Sachdeva, P., Kaur, K., Fatima, S., Mahak, F., Noman, M., Siddenthi, S. M., Surksha, M. A., Munir, M., Fatima, F., Sultana, S. S., Varrassi, G., Khatri, M., Kumar, S., Elder, M., & Mohamad, T. (2023). Advancements in myocardial infarction management: Exploring novel approaches and strategies. Cureus, 15(9). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45578
Zhou, Y., Wang, X., Lan, S., Zhang, L., Niu, G., & Zhang, G. (2021). Application of evidence-based nursing in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with heart failure. American Journal of Translational Research, 13(5), 5641–5646. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205824/ Determining the Credibility of Evidence and Resources
