ESSAY: Reducing the Risk of Foodborne Illnesses

Evidence-Based Practice Proposal – Section C: Literature Support To begin, work through the reference list that was created in the “Section B: Problem Description” assignment in Topic 2. Appraise each resource using the “Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklis

Reducing the Risk of Foodborne Illnesses 85.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) Satisfactory (79.00%) Good (87.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 50.0%
Overview of the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Plan (HACCP) 50.0% Includes little or no information about HACCP. Subject knowledge is not evident. Analysis of the criteria is not outlined or outlined poorly. Includes little knowledge about HACCP with few supporting details and examples. Little subject knowledge is evident. Includes knowledge about the topics with supporting details and examples. Some knowledge of HACCP and its advantages is evident. Surface level of evaluation of the content is offered. Includes essential knowledge about the topics including history of HACCP, advantages of use, and description of critical control points and includes supporting details and examples. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Analysis is direct, competent, and appropriate of the criteria. Covers topic in-depth with extensive details and examples. Subject knowledge is excellent.

Presentation 30.0%
Speaker Notes 15.0% The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor The speaker notes lack logical sequence of information. Description of ideas is unclear. The speaker notes are vague or insufficient to explain content. The speaker notes are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. The speaker notes are written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information, exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. The speaker notes are written clearly and concise. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. Provides specific information necessary to assist the audience in understanding each slide?s importance.

Layout 15.0% The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text. The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

Organization & Effectiveness 20.0%
Language Use and Audience Awareness (Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) 10.0% Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of ?primer prose? indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

Mechanics of Writing (Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.) 5.0% Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. Writer is clearly in control of standard, written academic English.

Evaluating and Documenting Sources (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, references page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style.) 5.0% Contains no title slide, no references section, and no correctly cited references within the body of the presentation. Title slide is incomplete or inaccurate. References section includes sources, but many citation errors. Citations are included within the body of the presentation, but with many errors. Title slide has minor errors. References section includes sources, but they are not consistently cited correctly. Citations are included within the body of the presentation but with some errors. Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources with minimal errors. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation. Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation.

Total Weightage 100%

ANSWER

Evidence-Based Practice Proposal – Section C: Literature Support

Health conditions among geriatric population is a common issue that requires proper pain management techniques. Various literature materials have featured evidence based techniques that can be used to ensure…

Search Method

            A broad electronic search was done using medical research databases such as CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, GCU Library, OVID, Medline, and CDSR. The search focused on peer-reviewed journals written in English and published from the year 1995 to 2019. The keywords used to come up with a reliable search results include; pain management in geriatrics, pain control, opioid use in older adults, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, geriatric trauma pain, nursing adults, and chronic pain.  The search results revealed 65 publications that consists of systematic reviews, cohort descriptive studies, randomized control trials, and quantitative studies. All literature…

Literature Support

Article by Ayalon et al. (2010) features relevant strategies in which physicians can clinically reduce hospital stay and cases of readmission. The authors sought to study whether multimodal pathway that focus on pre-emptive nausea and pain management as well as pre-op discharge planning promote effective pain management, and support reduced length of hospital stay without increasing post-op complications (Ayalon et al., 2010). Nausea control and pain management in total knee replacement processes are important variables that illustrate how clinical pathway as an approach of disease treatment and pain management can help in improving quality of care among geriatrics. Another article by Booker and Haedtke (2016) offers details on how pain can be determined among verbal older adults as a means to facilitate quality care provision. The authors outline various techniques that nurses may use to diagnose older adults to help reduce hospital readmission. The authors recommend that nurses have to use their experience and judgment to determine older adult’s verbal ability and reliability as well as readiness to self-report pain. In addition, valid and reliable pain scale…