D029 CPE Phase 2

D029 CPE Phase 2

Name

 Western Governors University

D029 Informatics for Transforming Nursing Care

Prof. Name

Date

Phase 2 Clinical Practice Experience for Informatics for Transforming Nursing Care

Overview of the Phase 2 Clinical Practice Experience

This report presents a comprehensive summary of the Phase 2 clinical practice experience completed as part of the course Informatics for Transforming Nursing Care at Western Governors University. The experience focused on applying informatics principles to examine nursing engagement with research utilization and evidence-based practice. Included in this report are the planned schedule of clinical activities, demographic and professional characteristics of participating nurses, descriptive statistical analyses, and an evaluation of perceived barriers to integrating research into clinical practice. Collectively, these findings provide insight into both individual and organizational factors that influence the translation of nursing research into practice settings.

What is the schedule for Phase 2 clinical practice activities?

The Phase 2 clinical practice activities followed a structured timeline designed to promote consistent progress while allowing sufficient time for data analysis and documentation. This schedule supported effective workload management and ensured that each component of the clinical experience was addressed systematically.

Table 1
Phase 2 Clinical Practice Activity Schedule

Activity	Estimated Time	Estimated Completion Date
Completion of Clinical Practice Experience Schedule Table	30 minutes	To be determined
Data Analysis (Continuous, Categorical, Nominal, Ordinal Variables)	4 hours (total)	To be determined
Educational Level Pivot Table and Screenshot	1 hour	To be determined

This structured timeline facilitated careful examination of the data while reinforcing the importance of organization and time management in clinical informatics practice.

What are the descriptive statistics related to perceived barriers to research utilization?

Analysis of total barriers scores

A total of 76 registered nurses participated in the assessment of perceived barriers to research utilization. Responses were quantified to generate an overall barriers score for each participant, allowing for statistical analysis of central tendency and variability.

Table 2
Descriptive Statistics for Total Barriers Scores

Statistic	Value
Mean total barriers score	73.30
Median score	75
Mode score	82
Standard deviation	14.00
Score range	44–103
Sum of all scores	5,571

The mean score of 73.30 reflects a moderate level of perceived barriers among participants. The relatively wide range and standard deviation indicate notable variability in how nurses experience obstacles to research utilization. This variation suggests that individual, environmental, and organizational factors likely play a role in shaping perceptions of research integration.

How experienced are the participating nurses?

The professional experience of participants, measured in years of practice as registered nurses, demonstrated substantial diversity. This variation in experience is important, as length of practice may influence familiarity with research, confidence in implementing evidence-based changes, and perceptions of institutional support.

Table 3
Descriptive Statistics for Years of Experience as a Registered Nurse

Statistic	Value
Mean years as RN	9.39
Median	7
Mode	8
Standard deviation	7
Experience range	2–28 years
Total combined years	714 years

With an average of approximately nine years of experience, the sample includes both early-career and highly seasoned nurses. This breadth of experience strengthens the relevance of the findings across multiple stages of professional development.

What are the demographic and professional characteristics of the sample?

The participating nurses represented a diverse population across age, gender, race or ethnicity, work setting, and educational background. Such diversity enhances the interpretability of findings by incorporating perspectives from varied nursing roles and environments.

Age distribution

• 19–39 years: 55 nurses
• 40–59 years: 15 nurses
• 60 years and above: 6 nurses

Gender distribution

• Female: 58
• Male: 18

Race and ethnicity

• White: 53
• African American: 12
• Asian: 9
• Other: 2

Primary healthcare setting

• Direct patient care: 42
• Academic roles: 16
• Community or public health: 11
• Other healthcare sectors: 7

Highest level of education completed

• Associate degree: 23
• Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN): 31
• Master of Science in Nursing (MSN): 16
• Doctoral degree (DNP or PhD): 6

The diversity observed across these characteristics provides a comprehensive view of how research utilization barriers may differ across roles, responsibilities, and educational preparation.

What barriers to research utilization were identified by the nurses?

Participants evaluated common barriers to research utilization using a four-point Likert scale, where 1 indicated “to no extent” and 4 indicated “to a great extent.” The findings reveal a clear distinction between system-level constraints and attitudes toward research itself.

Which barriers are considered most significant?

Barriers receiving the highest rating of 4 were identified as the most influential obstacles to research utilization:

• Limited awareness of available research findings
• Insufficient time to read and critically appraise research literature
• Lack of authority to implement practice changes
• Overabundance of available research information
• Inadequate time during work hours to apply new evidence

These findings underscore persistent organizational challenges, particularly those related to time constraints, decision-making autonomy, and information management. Addressing these issues is essential for improving the adoption of evidence-based nursing practices.

Which barriers were perceived as minimal?

Several barriers received the lowest rating of 1, indicating minimal perceived impact:

• Belief that research lacks value for clinical practice
• Absence of documented justification for practice change
• Doubt regarding the credibility of research findings

The low ratings assigned to these items suggest that nurses generally recognize the importance and legitimacy of research. Consequently, barriers to utilization are more strongly associated with structural and workflow limitations rather than negative attitudes toward research.

How does education level distribute across work settings?

Educational attainment varied by work environment, reflecting differing role expectations and professional requirements.

Table 4
Education Level by Work Setting

Work Setting	Associate Degree	BSN	MSN	DNP/PhD
Patient care	12	13	14	3
Academic roles	7	6	2	1
Community/Public health	1	9	0	1
Other settings	3	3	0	1

Advanced degrees were most prevalent in patient care and academic settings, suggesting increased emphasis on advanced education for leadership, teaching, and specialized clinical roles.

What is the racial composition across different age groups?

An examination of race and age cohorts reveals demographic trends within the nursing workforce.

Table 5
Racial Distribution by Age Group

Race	Age 19–39	Age 40–59
White	34	10
African American	9	3
Asian	8	1
Other	1	1

The data indicate that younger nurses constitute the majority of the sample across all racial groups, highlighting generational shifts within the nursing workforce and potential implications for future workforce planning and education.

Conclusion and Future Directions

The Phase 2 clinical practice experience provides valuable insight into the demographic composition, professional experience, and perceived barriers to research utilization among nurses. While participants demonstrate strong appreciation for the value of research, systemic barriers—particularly limited time, information overload, and restricted authority—continue to hinder effective implementation. Future research should explore relationships between education level, work setting, and perceived barriers, as well as evaluate targeted organizational strategies to support evidence-based nursing practice. Strengthening informatics competencies and institutional support mechanisms may significantly enhance research translation and patient care outcomes.

References

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Stetler, C. B., Damschroder, L. J., Helfrich, C. D., & Hagedorn, H. J. (2019). A guide for applying a revised version of the PARIHS framework for implementation. Implementation Science, 14(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0899-1

Titler, M. G. (2018). The evidence for evidence-based practice implementation. In R. G. Hughes (Ed.), Patient safety and quality: An evidence-based handbook for nurses. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Western Governors University. (2024). D029 Clinical Practice Experience Phase 2 Guidelines.

The post D029 CPE Phase 2 appeared first on NURSFPX.com.