Implementation of evidence-based methods into the process of treatment has become an effective strategy for minimizing the risks of medical errors as well as reducing the chances of prescribing unnecessary treatment to the patient. However, many healthcare institutions still find it difficult to implement evidence-based practice into their routines (JoAnn, n.d.). To make the process of integration easier, the medical scientist singled out several steps toward its successful implementation. The number of these steps varies from six to eight, depending on the scientists and the methods of selection they used for their research.
The eight-step process of integration of evidence-based practice into the healthcare system includes eight stages that begin and end with the patient and his health. The first step is cultivating that concern by establishing specific questions that need to be addressed to the patient regarding the symptoms he has. Then comes the stage of asking these questions, as the rightly formulated and properly analyzed ones help the doctor establish the right diagnosis without any unnecessary interventions (JoAnn, n.d.). The next stage is called gathering the evidence. It may be obtained from empirical, ethical, personal, or other sources such as medical databases or encyclopedias. The fourth stage concerns assessing the gathered data to establish whether the information applies to the current situation (JoAnn, n.d.). The fifth stage is called action, and during it, the medical personnel that the evidence that was got during the previous stages is relevant, reliable, and beneficial for the patient and his health. These five stages concern only the process of gathering information about the patient’s symptoms and the scientific evidence for confirmation of his disease and establishing the possible ways of treatment.
The last three stages of implementing evidence-based practices into the clinical environment of a particular healthcare institution concern the application and assessment of the evidence in practice. Thus, the sixth stage is doctors’ applying the evidence through collaborative decision-making with individual patients or groups of patients. If appropriately organized, the decision-making integrates the values, context, and preferences of the patient as well as the resources available for his treatment. The seventh stage concerns the assessment of the outcomes for the patient. During it, the medical personnel compares the results implementing the instruments that were used during the first analysis of the scientific evidence that was used before and after the medical intervention (JoAnn, n.d.). The final eighth stage is called dissemination of the project, as the healthcare providers need to share their knowledge and experience with their colleagues to ensure effective treatment at all levels.
Colorectal cancer is the second reason for the deaths of patients with cancer in the United States. Hence, it is necessary to study the problem and implement the methods that will help diagnose the disease at its early stages and cure it. Though a huge variety of tests is already conducted in the field, a lot of patients are still skeptical about the most effective one, which is CRC screening. The first barrier to its implementation concerns the fact that the rates of those who can undertake it are substantially lower for citizens who do not have health insurance (Hannon et al., 2019). Apart from that, not all healthcare institutions have financial opportunities to conduct CRC screening among patients from 50 to 75 years old. Statistically, they have the highest risks of colorectal cancer development (Hannon et al., 2019). In addition, not all patients are eager to go through the unpleasant procedure of screening even though they have risks of the development of the disease.
To overcome these barriers, it is necessary to raise public consciousness concerning colorectal cancer and evidence-based methods of preventing and curing it. Thus, some hospitals in the USA conducted policies that targeted increasing the patients’ consciousness of colorectal cancer preventive measures. The first means were brochures, posters, or postcards that targeted the importance of CRC screening. Apart from that, provider reminders and provider assessment and feedback were implemented, specifically, for the healthcare providers to recommend the screening to their patients (Hannon et al., 2019). In addition, the Colorectal Cancer Control Program launched grants for healthcare institutions that implement evidence-based practices for treating patients with colorectal cancer. These grants enabled the doctor to conduct tests for all the patients who needed them despite their social status or having medical insurance.
Barrubés, L., Babio, N., Becerra-Tomás, N., Rosque-Esteban, N. & Salas-Salvadó (2019). Association between dairy product consumption and colorectal cancer in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies. Advances in Nutrition, 10. Web.
González-Senac, N. M., Mayordomo-Cava, J., Macías-Valle, A., Aldama-Marín, P., González, S. M., Cruz Arnés, M. L., Jiménez-Gómez, L. M., Vidán-Astiz, M. T. & Serra-Rexach, J. A. (2021). Colorectal cancer in elderly patients with surgical indication: State of the art, current management, role of frailty and benefits of a geriatric liaison. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(11). Web.
Hannon P. A, Maxwell AE, Escoffery C, Vu T, Kohn MJ, Gressard L, Dilllon-Summer, L., Mason, C. & DeGroff, A. (2019). Adoption and implementation of evidence-based colorectal cancer screening interventions among cancer control program grantees, 2009–2015. Prev Chronic Dis, 16:180682. Web.
Jiménez, I., Pacha, M. Á., Pares, D., Esteve, M., Troya, J., Roca., J., Canet, J., Julián, J-F. & Fernández-Llamazares, J. (2019). Survival and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly: A comparative study. Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas, 111(3), 193-198. Web.
JoAnn, M. (n.d.). Call to action: How to implement evidence-based nursing practice. Lippincott Nursing Center. Web.
Sasaki, M., Miyoshi, N., Fujino, S., Ogino, T., Takahashi, H., Uemura, M., Matsuda, C., Yamamoto, H., Mizushima, T., Mori, M. & Doki, Y. (2020). The geriatric nutritional risk index predicts postoperative complications and prognosis in elderly patients with colorectal cancer after the curative surgery. Scientific Reports, 10(1). Web.
Wilkins, T., McMechan, D. & Talukder, A. (2018). Colorectal cancer screening and prevention. American Family Physician, 97(10), 658-665. Web.
Zavadzki, M., Krzystek-Korpacka, M., Rząca, M., Czarnecki, R., Obuszco, Z. & Witkiewicz, W. (2018). Colorectal surgery in elderly population. Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny, 90(4), 29-34. Web.