Evidence Based Analysis of Burnout in Intensive Care Units Assessment

Assignment Overview

Research evidence appraisal tool for Quantitative article: High-level burnout in physicians and nurses working in adult ICUs: a systematic review and meta-analysis - PMC

Does this evidence answer the EBP question?

Yes - Continue appraisal

Article Summary Information

• Article Title: High-level burnout in physicians and nurses working in adult ICUs: a systematic review and meta-analysis
• Author: González-Gil, M. T., González-Blázquez, C., Parro-Moreno, A. I., Pedraz-Marcos, A., Palmar-Santos, A., Otero-García, L., Alcolea-Cosín, M. T., & Almagro-Casado, E.
• Number: N/A
• Population, size, and setting: ICU nurses and physicians; 21 included studies across multiple countries and hospital settings (adult intensive care units).
• Publication Date: 2021
• Evidence level and quality rating: Level I, High Quality

Study Findings That Help Answer the EBP Question:

• The study found high levels of burnout in ICU professionals, especially among nurses.
• Emotional exhaustion prevalence was 51%, depersonalization 40%, and low personal accomplishment 43%.
• The review emphasizes that ICU nurses face significant psychological strain, confirming the need for structured mental health interventions.
• The findings strongly support implementing formal support programs to reduce burnout in ICU settings.

Appraisal Workflow

Is this study: Quantitative
- Go to Section I (Quantitative Appraisal)

Section I: Quantitative Appraisal – B. Summary of Multiple Sources of Research Evidence

Level of Evidence:

 Level I (Systematic review of multiple RCTs and observational studies with meta-analysis)
(Per Appendix D: Systematic review of RCTs or experimental studies with meta-analysis qualifies as Level I)

Quality Appraisal Criteria:

• Were the variables of interest clearly identified? 
• Was the search comprehensive and reproducible?

• • Key terms stated 
  • Multiple databases searched
  • Inclusion/exclusion criteria stated 

• Was there a flow diagram that included the number of studies eliminated at each level of review? 
• Were details of included studies presented (design, sample, methods, results, outcomes, strengths, and limitations)? 
• Were methods for appraising the strength of evidence (level and quality) described? Yes
• Were conclusions based on results?

• • Results were interpreted 
  • Conclusions flowed logically from research question and results 

• Did the review include a section addressing limitations and how they were addressed? 

Brief Summary of Assessment Requirements

The assessment required a research evidence appraisal of a quantitative article focusing on high-level burnout among physicians and nurses in adult ICUs. The key requirements included:

1. Identification of the research question: Determine if the evidence addresses the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) question.

2. Article summary information: Include title, authors, population, sample size, setting, publication date, and evidence level.

3. Study findings: Summarize results relevant to the EBP question, including prevalence rates and implications for practice.

4. Appraisal workflow:

   • Identify the study type (quantitative).

   • Conduct a Section I quantitative appraisal, including the summary of multiple sources of research evidence.

5. Quality appraisal criteria:

   • Clear identification of variables of interest.

   • Comprehensive, reproducible search with key terms, multiple databases, and inclusion/exclusion criteria.

   • Presentation of study details and flow diagram of study selection.

   • Methods for appraising evidence strength.

   • Interpretation of results and logical conclusions.

   • Addressing study limitations.

6. Evidence level and quality rating: Assign a level and quality rating based on appraisal findings.

The assessment aimed to ensure students could critically appraise high-level quantitative research, extract meaningful data for practice, and link findings to evidence-based interventions.

Step-by-Step Approach Guided by Academic Mentor

The academic mentor guided the student through a systematic, stepwise process to complete the appraisal:

1. Confirmation of Relevance to EBP Question:

   • Mentor helped the student verify that the selected article directly addressed the burnout issues in ICU staff.

   • Decision: “Yes – Continue appraisal.”

2. Article Summary Documentation:

   • Mentor instructed the student to extract key information: title, authors, sample population, size, setting, publication date, and evidence level.

   • This step ensured clarity about the scope and applicability of the study.

3. Study Findings Extraction:

   • The mentor emphasized focusing on findings directly relevant to EBP, such as prevalence of emotional exhaustion (51%), depersonalization (40%), and low personal accomplishment (43%).

   • Student documented the implications for mental health interventions in ICU settings.

4. Quantitative Appraisal (Section I):

   • The mentor guided the student to categorize the study as Level I evidence (systematic review with meta-analysis).

   • Step included reviewing the design, sample, methods, outcomes, strengths, and limitations of included studies.

5. Quality Appraisal Criteria Evaluation:

   • Mentor led a systematic review of criteria:

     • Variables clearly identified 

     • Comprehensive search using key terms and multiple databases 

     • Inclusion/exclusion criteria clearly stated 

     • Flow diagram present 

     • Evidence appraisal method described 

     • Results interpreted and conclusions logically derived 

     • Limitations addressed 

6. Assigning Quality Rating:

   • Mentor assisted in assigning A – High Quality, confirming the robustness of evidence.

Outcome Achieved

By following the mentor-guided approach:

• The student successfully completed a high-quality evidence appraisal of the quantitative article.

• Key findings about burnout prevalence were summarized clearly and linked to evidence-based interventions.

• The appraisal workflow was fully documented, and the study was rated Level I, High Quality.

Learning Objectives Covered

1. Ability to critically appraise quantitative research articles.

2. Understanding of systematic review and meta-analysis methods.

3. Extraction of relevant evidence to answer an EBP question.

4. Application of quality appraisal criteria to determine evidence strength.

5. Linking research findings to practical interventions in ICU settings.

6. Developing skills to interpret results, identify limitations, and draw evidence-based conclusions.

Boost Your Learning with Our Assignment Solutions – Safely and Smartly!

Looking for guidance on your assignment? You can download our sample solution to get a clear idea of structure, research approach, and key points. Important: The sample is for reference only submitting it as your own work is considered plagiarism and can have serious academic consequences.

Want a stress-free way to excel? Order a fresh, plagiarism-free assignment solution crafted by our team of professional academic writers. Each solution is custom-written to meet your requirements, ensuring originality, accuracy, and top-quality references. With a fresh solution, you gain:

• Complete originality and academic integrity

• Step-by-step answers tailored to your assignment

• High-quality formatting and referencing

• Time-saving support while enhancing your learning