question archive When conducting a quality improvement project, why is it better to select a four-week time frame for the project versus a power analysis? How does the time-frame relate to feasibility? What is the difference between clinical and statistical significance and why are both important to the patient improvement outcomes of the project?  

When conducting a quality improvement project, why is it better to select a four-week time frame for the project versus a power analysis? How does the time-frame relate to feasibility? What is the difference between clinical and statistical significance and why are both important to the patient improvement outcomes of the project?  

Subject:NursingPrice:3.86 Bought12

When conducting a quality improvement project, why is it better to select a four-week time frame for the project versus a power analysis? How does the time-frame relate to feasibility? What is the difference between clinical and statistical significance and why are both important to the patient improvement outcomes of the project?

 

pur-new-sol

Purchase A New Answer

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE

Answer Preview

Whenever one conducts quality improvement project, one must always consider its environment. For the first question, it can lead to an assumption that a four-week time frame is really more essential than power analysis.

Why?

It is important that the project will rely on a specific or allocated time frame. This is essential in order to determine feedbacks regarding the project. The objective feedback that is going to be collected or gathered will result on whether there is an improvement within the given time-frame (four weeks). Whenever one conducts a project, the best thing to do is to attend to the participant's satisfactory level. The organization will be able to focus on specific areas that needs improvement and specific measures. However, when dealing with power analysis, one needs to rely on hypotheses and the sample size needed to carry out the project. The mishaps that may happen is that whenever there is an inadequate sample size. It may lead to a conclusion there will be no foundation to conduct this project. The resources will basically go on to waste.

As mentioned above in the first question, time-rate allows the project to be thoroughly checked. The project with time-frame will focus on how to strategized skills based on how the project will improve in time. It is feasible since there will always be a step-by-step or a friendly orientation to the ones involved. One may not have to arrive to different assumptions and vague conclusions in doing so.

Clinical significance is the deals with the therapeutic effect whether or not it has a significant effect in one's daily life. For example, imagine a safe treatment that can effectively reduce the amount of time you have fever from 48 hours to 10 hours. Do you want to buy an effective medicine? Yes! A person will eventually want to feel better immediately. If the decision led to a positive result, it may be concluded as "clinical significant".

In contrast, statistical significance is governed by the stating the p-value and confidence interval. It is statistical significant when the results showed that the p-value is lower or equal to 0.05. Whenever one opt for this style, it just concludes that it is merely by chance and does not really have a clear or concise reason whether it may be beneficial for the patient or not.