The present day’s health practice depends largely on continuous change for progressive improvement. Evidence-based practice (EBP) projects play an instrumental role in integrating current, relevant scientific knowledge to improve clinical outcomes. However, the outcomes are not standard and require guidance. Models are used to guide evidence-based practice (EBP) projects, and it is important to choose the most appropriate model.
Concerning the significance of models in guiding EBP projects, it is important to consider that change integration should be systematic. Time and resources to be used and who to involve should be defined in precision. Moullin et al. (2020) explained that change implementation frameworks provide change leaders with a structure for describing, guiding, analyzing, and implementing evaluation efforts. Doing so facilitates the advancement of generalizable implementation of scientific knowledge. Generally, a model that guides an EBP project shows how the main processes follow each other. The overall approach is well defined, and critical elements such as the problem focus, significance, outcome, timeline, implementation, and evaluation are outlined in precision.
Failing to choose the correct model has huge implications and can create bias in research. In agreement with Wyant (2017), organizations and change leaders must select the EBP model that best fits their care context. Choosing an incorrect model leads to a situation where the model used does not align with improvement goals and does not address priority clinical problems. Implementation and evaluation are done wrongly, and outcomes are misinterpreted. Eventually, outcomes and data may be highly opinionated as change leaders try to force favorable results after using a lot of time and resources. To avoid bias and implement change appropriately, change leaders should do an in-depth study of models and choose the most appropriate as clinical problems necessitate.
Order this paper