Staff Development and Patient Education Essay

Staff Development and Patient Education Essay

Staff Development and Patient Education Proposal

Healthcare‐associated bloodstream infections related to peripheral intravenous (PIV) lines remain a significant patient safety concern, with recent data at Sunnyvale Medical Center indicating a 2.8% infection rate, well above the 1.0% benchmark established by the National Healthcare Safety Network (The Joint Commission, 2020). Such outcomes jeopardize patient welfare and expose institutions to regulatory penalties and reputational harm. Staff development and patient education are recognized strategies for mitigating these risks by ensuring nurses possess the knowledge and skills required for evidence‐based PIV maintenance. In solving these issues, this proposal outlines a structured educational intervention grounded in adult learning theory, aligned with internal and external frameworks, and supported by robust evaluation. This paper intends to add to the discussion on elevating nursing practice, reducing infection rates, and fostering a culture of continuous quality improvement.

Identification of the Educational Need

Staff development encompasses a systematic assessment, implementation, and evaluation process aimed at sustaining clinical competence throughout one’s professional lifecycle. According to The Joint Commission (2020), at Sunnyvale, an audit revealed that only 68% of nursing staff completed PIV site assessments every four hours, per hospital policy, and documentation accuracy averaged 75%. A root‐cause analysis implicated deficits in understanding the evidence behind maintenance practices and inconsistent engagement with electronic documentation systems. Simultaneously, patient feedback highlighted discomfort attributable to delayed dressing changes and prolonged catheter dwell times (UpToDate, 2025). In response, the primary educational objective is to strengthen cognitive and procedural proficiency in PIV bundle adherence (The Joint Commission, 2020) —specifically emphasizing chlorhexidine‐impregnated dressings, sterile technique, and timely catheter replacement—to achieve at least 95% compliance across the nursing staff.

Internal and External Frame Factors

An effective educational initiative must address the interplay of internal organizational dynamics and external mandates. Internally, Sunnyvale’s telemetry and medical‐surgical units (staffed predominantly by RNs with two to five years of experience and 20% newly hired nurses) operate under high‐acuity conditions with frequent interruptions. This environment demands just‐in‐time learning modalities compatible with shift schedules (Madiraju et al., 2020). Moreover, Madiraju reports that in such a unit, where learning culture is mixed, veteran nurses often prefer didactic workshops, whereas newer staff lean toward self‐paced, digital modules.

Externally, The Joint Commission’s National Patient Safety Goals require adherence to evidence‐based catheter maintenance bundles to reduce infections (The Joint Commission, 2020). The Association for Nursing Professional Development (ANPD, 2022) standards further call for validated competency assessments and multimodal teaching approaches. Finally, UpToDate (2025) guidelines define the clinical best practices for PIV care. The program can optimize relevance and feasibility by aligning educational content with these external requirements and leveraging internal resources, such as the hospital’s e-learning platform and simulation laboratory.

Selection of Learning Theory

Two complementary frameworks will be employed to ensure the intervention’s design and evaluation are theory-driven. By first basing the criteria on Kim et al. (2022), the PRECEDE–PROCEED model offers a systematic approach to planning health education programs by working backward from desired outcomes (e.g., reduced infection rates) to identify predisposing (knowledge, attitudes), enabling (access to supplies, simulation lab), and reinforcing factors (peer and leadership support). Second, Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation—Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results—provides a structured method for assessing training effectiveness from learner satisfaction through organizational impact (Lee & Song, 2021). The PRECEDE–PROCEED model ensures comprehensive needs assessment and stakeholder engagement, whereas Kirkpatrick’s framework guides metric selection for both session‐level and program‐level outcomes.

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Educational Activity Design

The educational intervention is structured into four sequential modules that gradually build nurses’ knowledge, skills, and confidence in evidence‐based PIV maintenance. Learning objectives are carefully aligned with Bloom’s revised taxonomy to ensure progression from foundational understanding to application and evaluation (Dabney & Eid, 2024). First, participants will acquire essential knowledge by completing a self-paced e-learning module (45 minutes) that introduces the rationale for each PIV bundle element, which includes chlorhexidine‐impregnated dressings, aseptic field maintenance, and scheduled catheter replacement. This module employs microlearning videos and embedded formative quizzes, allowing nurses to control the pace and revisit concepts as needed, respecting adult learners’ need for autonomy and immediate relevance (Keating & DeBoor, 2018).

Building on this cognitive foundation, the second module is a hands-on workshop (2 hours) in the simulation laboratory. Small groups of four to five nurses will perform full PIV dressing changes on high-fidelity manikins, using real supplies and following a standardized procedural checklist. Faculty facilitators will provide real-time corrective feedback, reinforce psychomotor skills, and foster reflective practice. This immersive experience not only solidifies technical competence but also instills a culture of peer support and continuous improvement as participants observe and learn from one another (ANPD, 2022).

The third module, composed of a case-based group discussion (1 hour, advances participants to higher-order thinking by analyzing clinical scenarios involving patients with complex comorbidities or extended catheter dwell times. Through guided Socratic questioning, nurses will apply evidence to problem-solve and articulate contingency plans, thereby strengthening clinical judgment. Finally, to sustain gains and address common documentation errors, a monthly refresher micro-learning (15 minutes) delivered via the hospital’s mobile platform will highlight chart‐audit findings and provide targeted “tip of the month” guidance. This blend of asynchronous and synchronous, theory-driven, and practice-focused activities ensures a comprehensive learning experience that accommodates diverse learning preferences and shifts nurses toward consistent, guideline-adherent practice.

Learning objectives include achieving at least 95% correct responses on post-module quizzes, demonstrating at least 90% proficiency on procedural skills checklists, and self-reporting confidence scores of 4 or higher (on a 5-point scale) in documentation tasks. Instructional strategies range from multimedia presentations and interactive case discussions to hands-on skills practice and peer-learning exercises. These approaches align with adult learning principles by emphasizing relevance to clinical practice, allowing self-directed pacing, and respecting nurses’ prior experience.

Budget

Note: Cost‐benefit projections indicate that each avoided catheter‐related infection (average penalty ~$2,000 per case plus two hospital days at ~$1,500/day) would offset training expenses.

Evaluation Tools and Methods

Session‐level evaluation will utilize: (a) Kirkpatrick Level 1 Reaction via a post‐workshop satisfaction survey aligned with ANPD (2022) and Paul et al.’s (2024) standards; and (b) Kirkpatrick Level 2 Learning through pre‑ and post-module quizzes (10 multiple‑choice questions) and direct observation of procedural skills using a validated skills checklist (interrater reliability κ ≥ 0.8). Program‐level evaluation encompasses: (a) Level 3 Behavior, assessed by monthly chart audits of PIV documentation compliance with a target of ≥95%; and (b) Level 4 Results, measured by quarterly tracking of catheter-related bloodstream infection rates (goal <1%) and average PIV dwell time (goal ≤96 hours) (Kim et al., 2022). All tools will undergo pilot testing on 10% of participants to confirm validity and reliability before full deployment.

Analysis of the Existing Evaluation Plan and Continuous Improvement

Currently, Sunnyvale employs only immediate post‐training surveys and a one-time skills check, lacking follow-through on behavior change and patient outcomes. Based on insights by Buljac-Samardzic et al. (2020), this fragmented approach limits insights into sustained practice improvements. To remedy this, evaluation data will feed an iterative quality‐improvement cycle: deficits identified in Level 2 quizzes will prompt targeted microlearning addenda; chart audit trends at Level 3 will be discussed in monthly unit huddles, triggering peer-led mini‑sessions to address recurring documentation errors; and Level 4 outcome data on infection rates will inform quarterly Quality & Safety Committee reviews, guiding adjustments to simulation scenarios and resource allocation. Researchers further elaborate that this continuous loop, reflective of Donabedian’s structure–process–outcome paradigm (Khalil et al., 2022), ensures the program evolves in response to real‐world performance metrics.

Presentation for Nursing Staff

To engage staff effectively, a concise 20-slide PowerPoint will introduce the initiative: beginning with the problem statement and benchmark data, it will then proceed to articulate learning objectives, theoretical underpinnings, module descriptions, budget summary, and detailed evaluation plans. Visual elements, including flowcharts of the PRECEDE–PROCEED phases, Kirkpatrick’s evaluation ladder, and infographics summarizing infection‐reduction goals, will clarify complex processes (Lee & Song, 2021). Where necessary, embedded video snippets of simulated dressing changes and anonymized audit dashboards will contextualize learning points. The concluding slides will outline the next steps, participation incentives (such as Continuing Education credits), and avenues for feedback, thereby promoting transparency and shared ownership.

Conclusion

Addressing peripheral intravenous catheter maintenance deficiencies through a rigorously designed, theory‐based educational program promises to enhance nursing competence, reduce infection rates, and fulfill regulatory mandates. By integrating the PRECEDE–PROCEED planning model with Kirkpatrick’s multi‐level evaluation framework and by embedding continuous quality‐improvement loops, Sunnyvale Medical Center can transform staff development into a dynamic engine for patient safety. Sustaining this momentum requires ongoing leadership support, data‐driven refinements, and recognition of nursing staff achievements—thereby fostering an enduring culture of excellence and lifelong learning.

References

ANPD. (2022, April 19). NPD Scope and Standards 4th Ed. – April 2022. ANPD; ANPD. https://www.anpd.org/Resources/Member-Resources/TrendLines/npd-scope-and-standards-4th-ed-april-2022

Buljac-Samardzic, M., Doekhie, K. D., & Wijngaarden, J. D. H. (2020). Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: A systematic review of the past decade. Human Resources for Health, 18(2), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-019-0411-3

Dabney, B. W., & Eid, F. (2024). Comparing educational frameworks: Unpacking differences between Fink’s and Bloom’s taxonomies in nursing education. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2024.05.012

Keating, S. B., & DeBoor, S. S. (2018). Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing education. Springer Publishing Company, LLC.

Khalil, M., Ravaghi, H., Samhouri, D., Abo, J., Ali, A., Sakr, H., & Camacho, A. (2022). What is “hospital resilience”? A scoping review on conceptualization, operationalization, and evaluation. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 1009400. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1009400

Kim, J., Jang, J., Kim, B., & Lee, K. H. (2022). Effect of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on health programs: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02092-2

Lee, H., & Song, Y. (2021). Kirkpatrick model evaluation of accelerated second-degree nursing programs: A scoping review. Journal of Nursing Education, 60(5), 265–271. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20210420-05

Madiraju, C., Tellez-Corrales, E., Hua, H., Stec, J., Nauli, A. M., & Brown, D. M. (2020). Analysis of student perceptions of just-in-time teaching pedagogy in pharmd microbiology and immunology courses. Frontiers in Immunology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.00351

Paul, S., Rajarshi Roy Burman, & Singh, R. (2024). Training effectiveness evaluation: Advancing a Kirkpatrick model-based composite framework. Evaluation and Program Planning, 107, 102494–102494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102494

The Joint Commission. (2020). Speak up campaigns. Www.jointcommission.org. https://www.jointcommission.org/resources/for-consumers/speak-up-campaigns/

UpToDate. (2025). UpToDate. Uptodate.com. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/infection-prevention-general-principles?search=learning%20feedback%20&source=search_result&selectedTitle=6~150&usage_type=default&display_rank=6

CLICK HERE TO ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

Staff Development and Patient Education

Address an educational need among nursing staff at a health care agency. Identify the educational need, assess internal and external frame factors, select a learning theory, develop a budget and an evaluation tool.

• Include an analysis of the evaluation plan in place for individual sessions and the program as a whole.
• Is there any evidence that the data collected for evaluation are used to revise the program and improve quality?
• Ceate a presentation that would meet the nursing staff’s educational needs.

Structure:

• • Objectives and detail
  • Educational Activity Content
  • Participant Evaluation details needed

Resources:

• Keating, S. B., & DeBoor, S. S. (2018). Curriculum Development and Evaluation in Nursing Education (4th ed.). Springer Publishing Company. Review Chapters 7, 8, 9, & 10 & 11.
• Association for Nursing Professional Development. (2017, February 22). NPD Practice Model. [Video.] YouTube.
• The Association for Nursing Professional Development. (2020). The Association for Nursing Professional Development.
• UpToDate. (2020). Patient Education.
• The Joint Commission. (2020). Speak Up Campaigns