Running Head: CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 1
Running Head: CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 1
Running Head: CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 1
Capstone Proposal
Mallory White
Aspen University
January 2019
CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 2
Capstone Proposal
The following is a proposal for a thesis and capstone project for the completion of a
Project Title
Project Description
This project is designed with educational trainings in the form of clinical judgment
classes utilizing a high-fidelity simulation mannequin to reinforce the concepts of what it means
to be code ready. The classes are mandatory for all inpatient nursing departments, including the
psychiatric and physical rehabilitation units. The education department along with the code blue
committee will perform in-situ code blue events to monitor times of recognition of cardiac arrest,
initiating cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], defibrillation, and then the initial dose of
epinephrine for refractory ventricular fibrillation. With that data and feedback from participant
surveys, improvements will be made to the educational program for future events.
Project Rationale
Promoting positive patient outcomes is a primary goal of all healthcare workers. One
way to do that is to provide early and accurate interventions in times of medical emergencies.
The number one beneficiaries of this project are the patients. Research has shown that when
early and accurate interventions are carried out, patient outcomes improve. By promoting the
early recognition of patient deterioration and early intervention with CPR and defibrillation,
The nurses who attend the clinical judgment classes and participate in the in-situ code
blue events benefit from this project. They get to practice life-saving skills in a safe simulation-
CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 3
based environment. They also get the opportunity to make mistakes and learn from them without
causing any patient harm. The nurses also get the opportunity to get updates on hospital policies
and American Heart guidelines between advanced cardiovascular life support [ACLS] classes.
Project Goals
Goals for the clinical judgment classes and in-situ events are to provide a consistent
standard for nursing practice in medical emergencies. Each event was accompanied by
electronic-based surveys to gain insights into how to improve both the clinical judgment classes
Simulation in nursing is somewhat new, but there is a large amount of research showing
the benefits to nursing practice and patient education. A ProQuest search for clinical simulation
in nursing provided over 24,000 results of potential scholarly references. Because this project
focuses on staff performance during cardiac arrest, numerous references from the American
Heart Association were utilized, including the 2018 Get with the Guidelines [GWTG]
Journals like Continuing Education in Nursing and the Journal of Nursing Education also
education. Dr. Michelle Bussard wrote several articles in the Journal of Nursing Education
regarding the use of simulation to improve student clinical judgment and to meet course
Herbers and Heaser (2016) wrote an article in the American Journal of Critical Care
regarding implementing an in-situ mock code quality improvement program that was helpful in
gaining administrative support for this project. Prince et al. (2014) work in Clinical Medicine and
CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 4
Research on finding the key to a better code was also extremely helpful in determining how to
structure a code blue team to improve staff performance and patient outcomes.
The Journal of the Society in Healthcare also provided valuable articles regarding the use
of in situ simulated events in a healthcare setting. Barbeito et al. (2015) performed an in-situ
detect opportunities for optimization. Bajaj et al. (2018) discussed a culture of safety regarding
in-situ events to ensure that the educators performing the mock events took the safety of real
patients into consideration which may have meant some events have to be postponed,
rescheduled, canceled, or moved to another patient-care area. While there were many other
articles, these two stand out as being highly pertinent to this project and the in-situ planning
Procedure
All inpatient nurses attend clinical judgment classes during initial orientation and again
annually as a part of the nursing department competency requirements. Clinical judgment classes
were conducted as regularly scheduled for med-surg, progressive care, and critical care nurses
during initial nursing orientation processes. Students completed the class only after successfully
populations based on where the students worked. Students were expected to identify cardiac
arrhythmias, determine proper response, and anticipate treatment options for each scenario.
Clinical judgment classes were conducted and mandatory for all psychiatric and physical
rehabilitation nurses. Both units have registered nurses [RNs] and licensed practical nurses
[LPNs] on staff. Non-licensed personnel were also encouraged to attend, but it was not
mandatory. This student and her preceptor developed scenarios that were meant to be specific to
CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 5
patient populations that were seen in these nursing units. Requirements of patient care were also
based upon the experience and degree of practice of each student. The RNs from these units were
not required to take any EKG classes and none were ACLS certified. The LPN scope of practice
was also considered when conducting the classes. No nurses from these departments were
required to identify cardiac dysrhythmias, but were expected to be able to identify that something
Nurses and non-licensed from all inpatient units are required to attend the simulation
station at the annual competency skills day. The skills day sessions rotate staff every 20 minutes,
so not everyone gets to lead a scenario, but all are encouraged to participate. These events run
staff through a variety of patient scenarios and have expected interventions for the group to be
The nurses in all of the clinical judgment classes took turns being the primary nurse of a
patient who was showing signs of deterioration. It was up to the nurse to perform the necessary
assessments, gather information, and decide as to whether the patient’s presentation warranted a
call to a physician, a call for the MET, or a code blue. Once an emergency response was
activated, the rest of the students acted as the other members of the response teams and began
life-saving measures.
All classes were taught with the American Heart Association’s Get with the Guidelines
focused on the student’s ability to have the patient ‘code ready.’ Being code ready meant that in
the event of cardiac arrest, the nurses would begin CPR, perform bag-valve-mask ventilation
[BVM], apply 2-lead EKG monitor, apply fast patches and connect them to the defibrillator, and
CAPSTONE PROPOSAL 6
have the backboard under the patient. The goal was to promote early CPR and early defibrillation
In-situ code blue events were performed on nursing units at random without staff
forewarning. This student and her preceptor formed a group with a nurse from the quality
department, an emergency room clinical nurse educator, and a critical care physician. The group
worked together to develop scenarios for the in-situ events as well as determine debriefing topics
with those on the code team and us as a group. All scenarios involved a patient [high-fidelity
fibrillation rhythm.
Evaluation
The effectiveness of the clinical judgment classes was evaluated through the use of in-
situ code blue events featuring the high-fidelity mannequin and a cardiac arrest scenario. After
each in-situ event, the group sent out electronic-based surveys as a means of gaining feedback
from participants as to areas of future improvement of the educational program. The goal was to
obtain at least 20 survey responses with an evaluation of the program and feedback on how to
References
American Heart Association. (n.d.). Get with the guidelines-Resuscitation. Retrieved from
http://www.heart.org/en/professional/quality-improvement/get-with-the-guidelines/get-
with-the-guidelines-resuscitation/get-with-the-guidelines-resuscitation-clinical-tools
Bajaj, K., Minors, A., Walker, K., Meguredichian, M., & Patterson, M. (2018). "No-go
considerations" for in situ simulation safety. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the
doi:10.1097/SIH.0000000000000301
Barbeito, A., Bonifacio, A., Holtschneider, M., Segall, N., Schroeder, R., & Mark, J. (2015). In
Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 10(3), 154-162.
doi:10.1097/SIH.0000000000000087
doi:10.3928/01484834-20160816-06
Herbers, M. D., & Heaser, J. A. (2016). Implementing an in situ mock code quality improvement
Prince, C. R., Hines, E. J., Chyuou, P. H., & Heegemar, D. J. (2014). Finding the key to a better
code: Code team restructure to improve performance and outcomes. Clinical Medicine &