Kerry A Milner, Deana Hays, Susan Farus-Brown, Mary C Zonsius, Elizabeth Saska, Ellen Fineout-Overholt
{"title":"National evaluation of DNP students' use of the PICOT method for formulating clinical questions.","authors":"Kerry A Milner, Deana Hays, Susan Farus-Brown, Mary C Zonsius, Elizabeth Saska, Ellen Fineout-Overholt","doi":"10.1111/wvn.12709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The intent of the PICOT (i.e., Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time) method is to formulate focused clinical questions to facilitate the discovery of relevant evidence through systematic searching, with the components of the question serving as the foundation for the search. Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) graduates use evidence-based practices to institute changes in their organizations' systems and policies, thereby yielding positive effects on both patient and system outcomes. Given that the clinical question is the foundation of the evidence-based practice process, DNP graduates' competence in the PICOT method needs to be better understood.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This analysis aimed to describe how DNP students used the PICOT method to ask clinical questions in their DNP projects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Project questions were retrieved from a subset (n = 129, 60.56%) of an existing national random sample of publicly available DNP projects spanning the years 2010 to 2021 from Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education-accredited schools (n = 213). Project questions using the PICOT method were further evaluated with a scoring system of 0 = no and 1 = yes for missing elements, formatting, directional outcome, and project purpose. Possible scores ranged from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more errors. Discussion among five researchers, until agreement was achieved, yielded consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although the PICOT method was project author-identified in 66 (31.0%) projects, only four (6%) followed the PICOT method. All 66 (100%) were intervention questions. There were 2.74 (SD 1.55) mean errors, ranging from 0 to 6. No questions were missing P or O. Specific errors included missing I 3 (4.5%) or missing C 37 (56%), poor formatting 34 (51.5%), directional outcome 44 (66.7%), and project purpose 38 (57.6%). Thirty-three (50%) of the questions were missing T; however, T is not used for searching, so researchers recalculated the mean error without T (M = 2.24, SD = 1.28, range 0-5).</p><p><strong>Linking evidence to action: </strong>Gaps in the accurate use of the PICOT method to construct clinical questions can lead to biased searches, inaccurate clinical problem identification, and, when used as the project purpose, jumping to non-evidence-based solutions. Academic faculty and clinical educators can mitigate these skewed outcomes and enhance their impact on quality outcomes by helping DNP-prepared nurses shore up this foundational skill.</p>","PeriodicalId":49355,"journal":{"name":"Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing","volume":" ","pages":"216-222"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12709","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The intent of the PICOT (i.e., Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time) method is to formulate focused clinical questions to facilitate the discovery of relevant evidence through systematic searching, with the components of the question serving as the foundation for the search. Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) graduates use evidence-based practices to institute changes in their organizations' systems and policies, thereby yielding positive effects on both patient and system outcomes. Given that the clinical question is the foundation of the evidence-based practice process, DNP graduates' competence in the PICOT method needs to be better understood.
Aims: This analysis aimed to describe how DNP students used the PICOT method to ask clinical questions in their DNP projects.
Methods: Project questions were retrieved from a subset (n = 129, 60.56%) of an existing national random sample of publicly available DNP projects spanning the years 2010 to 2021 from Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education-accredited schools (n = 213). Project questions using the PICOT method were further evaluated with a scoring system of 0 = no and 1 = yes for missing elements, formatting, directional outcome, and project purpose. Possible scores ranged from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more errors. Discussion among five researchers, until agreement was achieved, yielded consensus.
Results: Although the PICOT method was project author-identified in 66 (31.0%) projects, only four (6%) followed the PICOT method. All 66 (100%) were intervention questions. There were 2.74 (SD 1.55) mean errors, ranging from 0 to 6. No questions were missing P or O. Specific errors included missing I 3 (4.5%) or missing C 37 (56%), poor formatting 34 (51.5%), directional outcome 44 (66.7%), and project purpose 38 (57.6%). Thirty-three (50%) of the questions were missing T; however, T is not used for searching, so researchers recalculated the mean error without T (M = 2.24, SD = 1.28, range 0-5).
Linking evidence to action: Gaps in the accurate use of the PICOT method to construct clinical questions can lead to biased searches, inaccurate clinical problem identification, and, when used as the project purpose, jumping to non-evidence-based solutions. Academic faculty and clinical educators can mitigate these skewed outcomes and enhance their impact on quality outcomes by helping DNP-prepared nurses shore up this foundational skill.
期刊介绍:
The leading nursing society that has brought you the Journal of Nursing Scholarship is pleased to bring you Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing. Now publishing 6 issues per year, this peer-reviewed journal and top information resource from The Honor Society of Nursing, Sigma Theta Tau International, uniquely bridges knowledge and application, taking a global approach in its presentation of research, policy and practice, education and management, and its link to action in real world settings.
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing is written especially for:
Clinicians
Researchers
Nurse leaders
Managers
Administrators
Educators
Policymakers
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing is a primary source of information for using evidence-based nursing practice to improve patient care by featuring:
Knowledge synthesis articles with best practice applications and recommendations for linking evidence to action in real world practice, administra-tive, education and policy settings
Original articles and features that present large-scale studies, which challenge and develop the knowledge base about evidence-based practice in nursing and healthcare
Special features and columns with information geared to readers’ diverse roles: clinical practice, education, research, policy and administration/leadership
Commentaries about current evidence-based practice issues and developments
A forum that encourages readers to engage in an ongoing dialogue on critical issues and questions in evidence-based nursing
Reviews of the latest publications and resources on evidence-based nursing and healthcare
News about professional organizations, conferences and other activities around the world related to evidence-based nursing
Links to other global evidence-based nursing resources and organizations.