The US Preventive Services Task Force USPSTF has based its recommendations on

The us preventive services task force uspstf has

This preview shows page 4 - 6 out of 7 pages.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has based its recommendations on an evidence-based model of clinical prevention (Leipzig et al., 2010). However, patients with multifactorial serious illness may complicate outcomes research. Most outcomes measurements are based on one disease or condition and the associated outcomes. Elderly populations are increasingly likely to have comorbidities that are not considered; therefore, the results of most outcomes measurements are not easily summarized for systematic review and the development of recommendations. Individuals Versus Groups
Image of page 4
Outcomes are most often measured at the individual level with no consideration of the interaction and dynamics between patients in the same groups. Question: Do interventions that work with individuals transfer successfully to groups? Or are there intervening variables caused by group dynamics that affect the successful transfer? Answer: Individual interventions for health improvement, social support and changing behaviors include weight loss, self-care for chronic conditions, cardiac rehabilitation, etc. However based on systematic reviews of specific lifestyle behaviors focused on individual behavior change, there is a lack of guidelines for designing, evaluating or reporting health improvement interventions in group settings (Hoddinott, Allan, Avenell, & Britten, 2010). So, yes, the characteristics and dynamics of the group affect the impact of an intervention that may be effective with individuals. The literature is unclear as to which intervention is more effective and efficient at improving health outcomes: individual or group. There are a variety of group factors that can create and influence, including leadership style, the characteristics of the individual participants, and the multiple interactions that take place within a group context. Hoddinott, Allan, Avenell, and Britten (2010) propose an in-depth framework to be utilized as an initial step toward creating interventions for groups. Another consideration for outcomes measurement has been discussed by McLeroy, Bibeau, Steckler, and Glanz (1988). They believe that the level at which the intervention occurs needs to be evaluated because it will influence the outcome measurements. They theorize that the macro, meso, or micro levels each have their own variables that can affect individual and group outcomes. Nurse-Sensitive Process and Outcome Indicators at the Population Level Although there are many ways to measure outcomes, the APN can view the alternatives of clinical quality, customer satisfaction, core business processes, and utilization of healthcare resources. Comparison of outcomes is essential to support the reliability and validity of the outcome measures. For this purpose, standardized data definitions should be utilized. In recognition of the importance of comparison data sets, external comparisons and guidelines for standardized numerators and denominators have been developed by both private and governmental agencies. The APN should be familiar with the organizations that are driving forces in this area. The following are examples of
Image of page 5
Image of page 6

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture