CHRONIC DISEASE EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PROGRAM DESIGN
ASSIGNMENT
INTRODUCTION
The management of chronic disease poses a significant healthcare challenge in the United States and elsewhere. By the year 2030, chronic disease could cost the world over 47 trillion dollars annually (Duff-Brown, 2017). Many of the factors that contribute to chronic illness—such as poor diet, lack of activity, drug and alcohol use, and smoking—are lifestyle choices. Consider, for instance, type II diabetes: The significant increase in prevalence from 1980 to 2007 is explainable almost entirely by lifestyle choices. The condition is often long term, can cause serious complications, and is responsible for 25% of all healthcare spending in the U.S. (Riddle & Herman, 2018).
The healthcare field has a plethora of epidemiologic information on chronic disease. In turn, this epidemiologic information can be applied to the development of interventions that can make a difference in the health of populations afflicted with these conditions. As you approach this week, consider what opportunities you see, as an advanced practice nurse, for reducing morbidity and mortality—and, ultimately, for diminishing the tremendous personal and societal costs—related to chronic disease.
This week, you will design a program to address a population health issue that resonates with you.
References:
Duff-Brown, B. (2017, March 7). Non-communicable disease could cost global economy $47 trillion by 2030. UCSF Institute for Global Health Sciences. https://globalhealthsciences.ucsf.edu/news/non-communicable-disease-could-cost-global-economy-47-trillion-2030
Riddle, M. C., & Herman, W. H. (2018). The cost of diabetes care—an elephant in the room. Diabetes Care, 41(5), 929–932. https://doi.org/10.2337/dci18-0012
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Students will:
- Summarize epidemiologic literature on chronic diseases
- Apply concepts, theories, and methods of program design to population health issues
APPLYING EPIDEMIOLOGY TO PROGRAM DESIGN FOR CHRONIC DISEASE
Roughly 28.5 million Americans were still uninsured as of 2017, and 133 million Americans […] suffer from at least one chronic condition.
—Nash et al. (2021, p. 5)
As you know, promoting positive social change is a part of the Walden mission. To be an effective agent for social change, nurses must be able to logically and critically analyze population health issues using epidemiologic concepts, and then translate this knowledge into evidence-based practice to improve healthcare outcomes. This exercise will afford you such an experience at the population level. This is an exciting time to be working in the field of population health with all the new, dynamic, and innovative technologies and strategies to help patients and populations become more knowledgeable about their health.
This week’s Learning Resources present numerous health problems that result in a need for ongoing care. Your Assignment is to select a chronic disease of professional importance to you, and then design an intervention program to improve the health of populations affected by it.
Reference:
Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021). Population health: Creating a culture of wellness (3rd ed). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
LEARNING RESOURCES
Required Readings
- Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2020). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice(3rd ed.). Springer.
- Chapter 7, “Concepts in Program Design and Development”
- Center for Community Health and Development. (n.d.). Toolkits. In Community tool box.Links to an external site.University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/toolkits
Note: The toolkits page provides guidance on designing and developing programs to improve population outcomes.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP): Links to an external site.https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/index.htm
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Writing SMART objectivesLinks to an external site. Evaluation Briefs.
https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/pdf/brief3b.pdf
- The Community GuideLinks to an external site. (n.d.). https://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html
- Minnesota Department of Health. (n.d.). Smart objectivesLinks to an external site. https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/practice/resources/phqitoolbox/objectives.html
TO PREPARE:
- Review the Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) website from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
- Select one of the identified chronic diseases of national significance that impacts a population of interest to you.
- Consider a health outcome you would like to improve in this population related to the selected chronic disease.
- Develop a program proposal to improve this health outcome for this population using the assignment guidelines below. Select one of the program models in Curley, Chapter 7, to guide your planning.
- Review the SMART objective resources for a review of how to write objectives for your program.
- Use the Walden APA paper template, including appropriate APA 7 headings, to develop this Assignment.
THE ASSIGNMENT
In a 7- to 10-page proposal (not including title page and references), address the following:
- Briefly identify your selected chronic health issue and population.
- Describe the geographic region and important characteristics of this population.
- Describe the patterns of the disease in your selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time.
- Identify one health outcome you would like to improve for the population.
- Briefly summarize current evidence that supports the importance of improving this health outcome.
- Briefly describe the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.
- Explain what data you would need to collect, and how you would obtain and analyze it. You may choose to collect primary data or use secondary data. Justify your choice.
- Using the “SMART” method, write short- and long-term objectives for the program.
- Identify the stakeholders who should be involved in program planning.
- Identify which program planning model (see Curley, Chapter 7) you selected for your program. Justify your selection of model. Based on the model, explain how you would plan, implement, and evaluate the program.
- Explain any relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to your program design.
- Explain how you would fund the program. Get Negligent Tort Liability Essay Help!!
- Describe strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program.
Rubric
NURS_8310_Week10_Assignment_Rubric
| NURS_8310_Week10_Assignment_Rubric |
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn a 7- to 10-page proposal (not including title page and references), address the following: Briefly identify your selected chronic health issue and population. |
| 20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and concisely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population. |
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies the selected chronic health issue and population. |
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population. |
12 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population, or it is missing. |
|
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the geographic region and important characteristics of this population. |
| 20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and concisely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population. |
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population. |
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population. |
12 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population, or it is missing. |
|
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the patterns of the disease in your selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time. |
| 25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
An accurate and detailed description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
An accurate description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided, or it is missing. |
|
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify one health outcome you would like to improve for the population. |
| 20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and concisely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population. |
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population. |
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population. |
12 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population, or it is missing. |
|
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBriefly summarize current evidence that supports the importance of improving this health outcome. |
| 25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
A clear, concise, and well-organized summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
An accurate summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided, or it is missing. |
|
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBriefly describe the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population. |
| 20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and concisely the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population. |
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population. |
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population. |
12 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population. |
|
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain what data you would need to collect, and how you would obtain and analyze it. You may choose to collect primary data or use secondary data. Justify your choice. |
| 25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
An accurate and detailed explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. A strong justification for choices is provided. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
An accurate explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. Appropriate justification for choices is provided. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. Justification for choices is provided but may be somewhat vague or inaccurate. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided, or it is missing. Justification for choices is inadequate or missing. |
|
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUsing the “SMART” method, write short-term and long-term objectives for the program. |
| 25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
Clear and measurable short-term and long-term SMART goals for the program are provided. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
Measurable short-term and long-term SMART goals for the program are provided. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
Short-term and long-term goals for the program are provided but may be somewhat vague or not meet all SMART criteria. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor
Short-term and long-term goals for the program are vague or do not meet SMART criteria or are missing. |
|
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning. |
| 20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response accurately and concisely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning. |
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning. |
15 to >12.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning. |
12 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning or is missing. |
|
20 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify which program planning model you selected for your program. Justify your selection of model. Based on the model, explain how you would plan, implement, and evaluate the program. |
| 40 to >35.0 pts
Excellent
The response clearly and concisely identifies the program planning model and provides a strong justification for its selection…. An accurate and detailed explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided. Response reflects strong understanding and application of program planning concepts and strategies. |
35 to >31.0 pts
Good
The response clearly identifies the program planning model and provides an appropriate justification for its selection…. An accurate and appropriate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided. |
31 to >27.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies a program planning model and justifies the choice…. A somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided. |
27 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately or vaguely identifies a program planning model, or it is missing. Justification for selection is weak or missing…. A vague or inaccurate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation is provided, or it is missing. |
|
40 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain any relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to your program design. |
| 25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
An accurate and detailed explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided. |
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
An accurate explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided. |
19 to >17.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided. |
17 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided, or it is missing. |
|
25 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how you would fund the program. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent
An accurate and detailed explanation of how the program would be funded is provided. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good
An accurate explanation of how the program would be funded is provided. |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of how the program would be funded is provided. |
6 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of how the program would be funded is provided, or it is missing. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program. |
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent
An accurate and detailed description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided. |
8 to >7.0 pts
Good
An accurate description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided. |
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair
A somewhat inaccurate or vague description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided. |
6 to >0 pts
Poor
An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided, or it is missing. |
|
10 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity…. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time…. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time…. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
|
5 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting: The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
| 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
3 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
|
5 pts |
| Total Points: 300 |
