Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews
ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Question Description
Review the information in Chapter 5 of the course text, focusing on the steps for conducting a literature review and for compiling your findings.
Using the question you selected in your Week 2 Project (Part 1 of the Course Project), locate 5 or more full-text research articles that are relevant to your PICOT question. Include at least 1 systematic review and 1 integrative review if possible. Use the search tools and techniques mentioned in your readings this week to enhance the comprehensiveness and objectivity of your review. You may gather these articles from any appropriate source, but make sure at least 3 of these articles are available as full-text versions through Walden Library’s databases.
Read through the articles carefully. Eliminate studies that are not appropriate and add others to your list as needed. Although you may include more, you are expected to include a minimum of five articles. Complete a literature review summary table using the Literature Review Summary Table Template located in this week’s Learning Resources.
Prepare to summarize and synthesize the literature using the information on writing a literature review found in Chapter 5 of the course text.
To complete:

Write a 3- to 4-page literature review that includes the following:

A synthesis of what the studies reveal about the current state of knowledge on the question that you developedPoint out inconsistencies and contradictions in the literature and offer possible explanations for inconsistencies.
Preliminary conclusions on whether the evidence provides strong support for a change in practice or whether further research is needed to adequately address your inquiry
Your literature review summary table with all references formatted in correct APA style
Note: Certain aspects of conducting a standard review of literature have not yet been covered in this course. Therefore, while you are invited to critically examine any aspect of the studies (e.g., a study’s design, appropriateness of the theoretic framework, data sampling methods), your conclusion should be considered preliminary. Bear in mind that five studies are typically not enough to reflect the full range of knowledge on a particular question and you are not expected to be familiar enough with research methodology to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of all aspects of the studies.

Below is an example of the PICOT Question asked

My PICOT Question

The literature research question will be based on the PICOT question: In cardiac patients who have thoracic surgery, what are the effects of antibacterial soap baths and bacitracin prophylactic nasal swabs on preventing or decreasing Deep Sternal Wound Infections (DSWI)? Simple search term(s): Thoracic surgery and the effects of antibacterial soap baths and bacitracin prophylactic nasal swabs on preventing or decreasing Deep Sternal Wound Infections (DSWI).

I found two results on the topic ESGARAB, Terminology Workbook for Medical Interpreters: A Language-Neutral Reference Tool, which were peer-reviewed articles with no time range. However, after altering the timeline to register as 2014-2015, the only result that was evident was Terminology Workbook for Medical Interpreters: A Language-Neutral Reference Tool. This was one of the results derived from the prior search.This is a workbook which may be relied upon as a developmental tool, relied upon by medical interpreters.The reason for altering the timeline to a more specific timeframe was to ensure that the data I relied on was up to date, to the point, and dependable.

Next, I filtered the results using the terms antibacterial soap baths and bacitracin prophylactic nasal swabs in preventing or decreasing Deep Sternal Wound Infections in Thoracic surgery to which I found 11 results. Decolonization in the prevention of healthcare-associated infections; which the first article in the search results finds colonization among healthcare-associated pathogens inclusive of Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci, Clostridium Difficile, and Gram-negative organisms has been found to lead to infections while heightening the risk of getting affected. Decolonization is found therefore to be an evidence-based intervention that may be applicable in the plight to prevent HAIs which are in essence healthcare-associated infections.

The article also asserts that there may be studies focusing on the S. aureus decolonization as well as on the decolonization strategies meant to cut down the possibility of infections because of the Gram-negative organisms and more so the multidrug-resistant (Septimus, & Schweizer, 2016). The filtered results described the findings; Staphylococcal Decolonization in Surgery Patients which argues mainly that the Staphylococcus aureus is, in essence, a commensal skin bacterium that is profound in the anterior nares. In my research, I found that the patients found with the S. aureus have a higher risk of being infected by the same organism: nosocomial and surgical site infections. The methicillin-susceptible S. aureus contributes to severe infections.

Highly randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have been integrated in the plight in a bid to support the decolonization and assert the benefits thereof in cardiothoracic and orthopedic surgery patients although general surgery patients have been hindered by small sample sizes as well as the limited nuance of the S. aureus around surgical site infections (Ludwig, & Dellinger, 2018). The various results enable the comprehension of the dynamics of research and integrating the results thereof through analyzing the hierarchies of evidence, filtering tools, and the use of concise keywords.

References

Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Assignment: Clinical Microbiology Reviews

Ludwig, A. D., & Dellinger, E. P. (2018). Staphylococcal Decolonization in Surgery Patients. In Infection Prevention (pp. 93-101). Springer, Cham.

Septimus, E. J., & Schweizer, M. L. (2016). Decolonization in prevention of health care-associated infections. Clinical microbiology reviews, 29(2), 201-222.

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.