Importance of Theory, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing

Importance of Theory, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institutional Affiliations
Course Name and Number
Due Date
Importance of Theory, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing
Introduction to Research and EBP Concepts
Nursing has achieved significant milestones that have underscored the continued emphasis on using theory, evidence-based practice, and research. Researchers reveal that this discipline’s fundamental and sensitive role in influencing quality health outcomes for the patient has positioned research as a critical component for progressively improving care approaches (Arndt &Netsch, 2012). Stewart and Klein (2016) indicate that researchers employ theoretical techniques to boost the research rigor and ensure that results emerging from these studies advance nursing care. A combination of study findings, nursing expertise, standards, and values birth evidence-based practice (EBP), critical in transforming nursing care through relevance and quality outcomes (Hedges, 2009. Thus, research, theory, and evidence-based practice are fundamental principles that facilitate the process of nursing care through discipline-developing findings.
Integrating Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Quality Improvement into Practice
Compare and Contrast the Differences Between Research, Evidence-Based Practice, and Quality Improvement
The role of nurses is complex and dynamic, which requires them to recognize the differences and similarities between EBP, Quality Improvement (QI), and research because they apply in diverse contexts. For instance, Hedges (2009) indicates that QI differs from the other two because it focuses on the efforts of nurses in a particular setting or department to induce specific changes related to their workflow or other aspects, such as existing challenges in efficiency and clinical administration. Such an aspect highlights minimal interactions with the literature. Arndt and Netsch (2012) confirm that sometimes, QI leverages research to guide its process-improving projects through systematic data gathering. Moreover, it agrees with the other two components because its outcomes improve patient care.
The first similarity between research and QI is that both approaches recognize a clinical problem, and researchers can opt for statistical techniques. However, research is more thorough, involving complex and systematic methods of inquiry to address identified clinical questions, unlike QI. Hedges (2009) indicates that while QI focuses on identifying ways of directly benefiting the patients in a particular setting, research results prioritize generating new knowledge. Although both recognize the presence of extraneous variables, QI does not integrate control measures, unlike research that includes such aspects since it focuses on new information generation. Arndt and Netsch (2012) note that clinicians and the larger scientific population feel the benefits of research. Thus, unlike in the QI, they rarely present direct gains by the research subjects. Another primary variation between QI and research is that their time frame varies, with the latter taking significantly more time than the former.
EBP takes a unique approach that integrates existing research evidence and combines it with standards, values, and the expertise of healthcare professionals to boost healthcare outcomes. Although its goals of clinical problem solving are similar to that of QI and research to some extent, it does not engage in rigorous research. However, Hedges (2012) highlights its participation in systematically identifying emerging evidence and appraising it for informing nursing practice. Like research and QI, EBP uses a clinical question to guide its inquiry process and influence clinical decision-making. Thus, it borrows significantly from research and QI findings.
Distinguish and Explain Three Ways That Theory or Theoretical Frameworks Are Used in Nursing Research
Researchers use theories in nursing research in different ways. According to Stewart and Klein (2016), models are ideal for research rationale justification. They guide arguments about the importance of research and the likely impact on practice. Leeming (2018) supports this observation in the theoretical application while conducting qualitative studies. Stewart and Klein (2016) demonstrate their use in designing appropriate tools for data collection. Influencing these components ensures that the findings remain theory-based and plausible. Finally, theories provide a standardized approach for research aim or purpose construction. Their ability to explain relationships between variables offers a foundation for elucidating this concept, contributing to the importance of the study. As a result, considering theories in research is critical for streamlining the execution process.
Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies
Quantitative and qualitative research approaches differ in diverse ways. LoBiondo-Wood and Haber (2018) indicate that while the latter is discovery-oriented, descriptive, and explanatory, the former inclines toward analytical, logical, and numeric-dominated processes. Researchers conducting qualitative studies prioritize the ‘why’ question about behavior or issue, while quantitative research focuses on creating a statistical trend. LoBiondo-Wood and Haber (2018) further illustrate the distinct variations regarding the employed data collection techniques, with qualitative using focus groups and interviews, while the quantitative exploits surveys and experimental procedures. Such approaches lead to differing data that require different data analysis tactics too.
The two study methodologies differ significantly in their research goal. LoBiondo-Wood and Haber (2018) reveal that qualitative designs are more investigative and lead to hypothesis generation. Chicca (2020) provides a similar observation and adds that it facilitates the generation of theories. However, quantitative methods are conclusive and focus on hypotheses testing (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2018). The secon...