Literature Support | Research Report

Evidence-Based Practice Proposal - Section C: Literature Support To begin, work through the reference list that was created in the "Section B: Problem Description" assignment in Topic 2. Appraise each resource using the "Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklists," available in the textbook appendix. The specific checklist you use will be determined by the type of evidence within the resource. Develop a research table to organize and summarize the research studies. Using a summary table allows you to be more concise in your narrative description. Only research studies used to support your intervention are summarized in this table. Refer to the "Evaluation Table Template," available in the textbook appendix. Use the "Evaluation Table Template" as an adaptable template. Write a narrative of 750-1,000 words (not including the title page and referen

Running head: LITERATURE SUPPORT
LITERATURE SUPPORT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1LITERATURE SUPPORT
Introduction:
The paper aims for discussing the validity and the reliability of the references used in
the previous assignment. It is very important to use only the valid scholarly literatures for
development of an evidence-based practice to promote a safe and improved quality care. The
paper will discuss the search strategies that were used for this research at first and then it will
summarize all the studies, finally including a discussion on the validity of external and
internal research.
Discussion:
Description of the Search Method:
The keywords such as “Stroke complications”, “Fall in the acute care patients”, “Fall
in stroke patients”, “Prevention of fall in the Stroke Patients” were used for conducting a
research on the google scholar database and in the pubmed database. The search results were
reviewed manually and then 5 articles were selected to develop the EBP proposal. The
inclusion criteria were peer reviewed feature of the article and inclusion of the keywords,
such as “fall in the acute care patients” or “fall in the stroke patients”. The exclusion criteria
were any other languages except for English and non-peer reviewed resources.
Summarizing the Studies:
The first study was conducted by Davenport et al. The study was focused on
determining the complications among the patients suffering from acute stroke. The study
described falls to be the most common complication for the patients. The study was a cohort
study and thus it can be considered to have a moderate level of evidence. However, the article
did not include a bias consideration, which can be considered as a limitation of the study
(Davenport et al., 1996).

2LITERATURE SUPPORT
The second study was conducted by Dykes et al. The study aimed for determining the
fall prevention strategies to develop a fall prevention tool kit for the acute care patients. The
study found that some interventions such as application of appropriate communication, bed
posts and effective assessment of the fall risk can be used as the component of the tool kit to
achieve excellent fall management in the acute care patients. The study was a randomized
control trial and thus this study also provides a moderate level evidence. The study only
considered four hospitals for concluding its result. Thus it might not be valid for all the other
settings (ARE, 2010).
The third study was conducted by Dykes et al. The study aimed to explore the reasons
for the event of fall in the patients and how the event can be prevented. The study considered
the opinions of the healthcare workers to determine the reasons. The authors of this article
found that an appropriate patient care plan and a successful risk assessment can reduce the
fall events in the study. The article was appropriately structured, with a proper background
analysis. However, there was no bias consideration in the study, which can be considered as
limitation (Dykes et al., 2009).
The fourth study was conducted by Holloway et al. The study aimed to analyse the
medical errors in the stroke patients for promoting their safety. The study identified the event
of fall to be one of the major medical error in the stroke patients. The error event must be
prevented along with all the other error events to promote the patient safety and quality care.
The article was appropriately structured and adopted an appropriate data analysis method to
determine the results. However, the study also involved a single medical facility, which was a
limitation (Holloway et al., 2007).
The last study was Truelsen et al. The last study was a statistical study that described
the prevalence of stroke incidence in Europe. The study found that the event of stroke is

3LITERATURE SUPPORT
increasing in a rapid manner. The study was a review study and thus it was a high level of
evidence. However, the publication date of the study was 2006, which might limit the validity
if the study (Truelsen et al., 2006).
Internal and External Research Validity:
The internal research validity examines the study design, method and analysis along
with the bias consideration. The external research validity on the other hand examines the
generalizability of the study. The examination of both type of validity is important for
determining the overall validity of a research article (Patino & Ferreira, 2018).
Conclusion:
Hence it can be concluded that the research method used for finding the scholarly
sources involved using the keywords like Stroke complications”, “Fall in the acute care
patients” and others. The research was conducted on the google scholar database and on the
pubmed database. The chosen articles were reliable considering the topic of interest even
though there were some limitations. The internal research validity and the external research
validity consideration are equally important for determining the overall validity of a research
article.

4LITERATURE SUPPORT
References:
ARE, F. (2010). Fall Prevention in Acute Care Hospitals. JAMA, 304(17), 1912-1918.
http://unmhospitalist.pbworks.com/f/Fall+prevention+in+hosp+-
+randomized+trial.pdf
Davenport, R. J., Dennis, M. S., Wellwood, I., & Warlow, C. P. (1996). Complications after
acute stroke. Stroke, 27(3), 415-420. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.27.3.415
Dykes, P. C., Carroll, D. L., Hurley, A. C., Benoit, A., & Middleton, B. (2009). Why do
patients in acute care hospitals fall? Can falls be prevented?. The Journal of nursing
administration, 39(6), 299. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2FNNA.0b013e3181a7788a
Holloway, R. G., Tuttle, D., Baird, T., & Skelton, W. K. (2007). The safety of hospital stroke
care. Neurology, 68(8), 550-555.
https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000254992.39919.2e
Patino, C. M., & Ferreira, J. C. (2018). Internal and external validity: can you apply research
study results to your patients?. Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, 44(3), 183-183.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1590%2FS1806-37562018000000164
Truelsen, T., Piechowski‐Jóźwiak, B., Bonita, R., Mathers, C., Bogousslavsky, J., & Boysen,
G. (2006). Stroke incidence and prevalence in Europe: a review of available
data. European journal of neurology, 13(6), 581-598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
1331.2006.01138.x