Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– ## Capstonebuildup07_31_2025.pdf
**## Capstonebuildup07_31_2025.pdf**
Assignment 5:
Reflection
Due Sunday by 9:59pm
Points 25
Submitting a file upload
Available May 5 at 10pm – Aug 17 at 9:59pm
APA FORMAT REQUIRED FOR ALL ASSIGNMENTS
● Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
● Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point.
● Use 1” margins and in text citations
(Minimum of 3 to 5 pages)
Advocacy
● Analyze the nurse's role in leading change and driving improvements in the
quality and experience of care
● Explain how the intervention plan affects nursing and interprofessional
collaboration, and how the health care field gains from the plan
Future Steps
● Explain how the current project could be improved upon to create a bigger
impact in the target population as well as to take advantage of emerging
technology and care models to improve outcomes and safety
Reflection on Leading Change and Improvement
● Reflect on how the project has impacted your ability to lead change in
personal practice and future leadership positions
● Reflect on the ways in which the completed intervention, implementation, and
evaluation plans can be transferred into your personal practice to drive quality
improvement in other contexts
Address Generally Throughout
● Integrate resources from diverse sources that illustrate support for all aspects
of the project as appropriate throughout the final submission
● Clearly, concisely, and cohesively articulate a health care need, population,
setting, stakeholders, supporting evidence, intervention, and evaluation
This was my last work please go based on that
Capstone Evaluation Plan: Long-Acting Injectable Cabenuva for HIV Management
This evaluation plan is designed to determine the effects of long-acting injectable Cabenuva on
the management of HIV in virally suppressed adults in a period of six months. It establishes
objective results and uses a mixed-methods approach to assess the adherence, viral suppression,
patient satisfaction, and healthcare utilization, which guarantees strong, evidence-based results.
Outcome Goals
The intervention leverages Cabenuva to optimize HIV care. The primary outcome goals are:
1. Better Medication Adherence: The increase in adherence rate, which is the
number of monthly injection appointments, by at least 20 percent relative to the baseline
rate of oral antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence, will ensure that treatment is
consistent.
2. Sustained Viral Suppression: Achieve viral suppression (viral load <200
copies/mL) in 90 percent of participants at six months, relative to historical oral ART
data, to delay disease progression.
3. Improved Patient Satisfaction: Achieve a 15 percent increase in validated survey
satisfaction scores, indicating greater convenience and ease of treatment and less stigma,
leading to long-term patient engagement.
4. Lower Healthcare Utilization: Reduce HIV-related emergency care or
hospitalization by 10 percent to enhance affordable care and quality.
These outcomes advance health promotion, care quality, and resource efficiency for a vulnerable
population.
Evaluation Plan
Data Collection Methods
The evaluation is based on a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the impact of the intervention.
Quantitative ones involve monitoring the monthly attendance of injection appointments through
electronic health records (EHRs), which will be compared to the baseline oral ART adherence
(percentage of doses taken) (Slama et al., 2023). The viral load is measured at baseline, month 3,
and month 6 using lab reports and compared with the data of oral ART clinics. EHRs track the
number of emergency visits and hospitalizations related to HIV when compared to past records
of oral ART. Patient satisfaction is measured using the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short
Form (PSQ-18) at baseline and month 6 (Marshall & Hays, 1994).
Qualitative measures involve semi-structured interviews with 12 participants at month 6 to
explore treatment benefits, barriers, and stigma perceptions. Nurse focus groups at month 6
gather feedback on implementation challenges, such as training or workflow, and patient
engagement, providing nuanced insights into operational feasibility.
Evaluation Tools
The EHR system ensures secure, HIPAA-compliant tracking of adherence, viral load, and
utilization data, facilitating real-time monitoring. The PSQ-18, a validated instrument,
standardizes satisfaction assessment across care domains (Marshall & Hays, 1994). Interview
guides, developed with nursing and psychology expertise, align with cultural considerations and
intervention objectives to ensure relevant and sensitive data collection.
Timeline
Evaluation activities are structured over six months. In month 1, baseline data (adherence, viral
load, satisfaction) are collected, and staff are trained on protocols to ensure consistency. Months
2–5 involve monthly monitoring of adherence, viral load, and utilization. In month 6, final viral
load tests, PSQ-18 surveys, patient interviews, and nurse focus groups are conducted, followed
by data analysis. Post-month 6, findings are disseminated to stakeholders to inform future scaling
and policy decisions.
Stakeholder Responsibilities
Stakeholders play critical roles in the evaluation. Patients provide survey and interview data to
shape outcomes. Nurses collect clinical metrics and offer implementation feedback.
Administrators oversee EHR data extraction and resource allocation. Payers evaluate
cost-effectiveness to guide coverage decisions, ensuring the intervention’s sustainability.
Analysis
Quantitative data are analyzed using SPSS, with t-tests (p < 0.05) to compare outcomes between
Cabenuva and oral ART groups. Qualitative data undergo thematic analysis to identify themes,
such as stigma reduction, triangulated with quantitative results for validity. Outcomes are
benchmarked against HRSA standards to contextualize success (U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 2025). Bias is mitigated by blinding analysts to patient identities and using
multiple coders for qualitative reliability.
References
Marshall, G. N., & Hays, R. D. (1994). The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short
Form (PSQ-18). RAND Corporation.
Slama, L., Porcher, R., Linard, F., Chakvetadze, C., Cros, A., Carillon, S., … & Molina, J.
M. (2023). Injectable long acting antiretroviral for HIV treatment and prevention:
perspectives of potential users. BMC Infectious Diseases, 23(1), 98.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2025). Health Resources and Services
Administration: HIV/AIDS Bureau. https://hab.hrsa.gov/
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9)
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9)
[https://hab.hrsa.gov/](https://hab.hrsa.gov/)
– Assignment 5: Reflection
– Address Generally Throughout
**## Capstonebuildup07_31_2025.pdf**
Assignment 5:
Reflection
Due Sunday by 9:59pm
Points 25
Submitting a file upload
Available May 5 at 10pm – Aug 17 at 9:59pm
APA FORMAT REQUIRED FOR ALL ASSIGNMENTS
● Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
● Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point.
● Use 1” margins and in text citations
(Minimum of 3 to 5 pages)
Advocacy
● Analyze the nurse's role in leading change and driving improvements in the
quality and experience of care
● Explain how the intervention plan affects nursing and interprofessional
collaboration, and how the health care field gains from the plan
Future Steps
● Explain how the current project could be improved upon to create a bigger
impact in the target population as well as to take advantage of emerging
technology and care models to improve outcomes and safety
Reflection on Leading Change and Improvement
● Reflect on how the project has impacted your ability to lead change in
personal practice and future leadership positions
● Reflect on the ways in which the completed intervention, implementation, and
evaluation plans can be transferred into your personal practice to drive quality
improvement in other contexts
Address Generally Throughout
● Integrate resources from diverse sources that illustrate support for all aspects
of the project as appropriate throughout the final submission
● Clearly, concisely, and cohesively articulate a health care need, population,
setting, stakeholders, supporting evidence, intervention, and evaluation
This was my last work please go based on that
Capstone Evaluation Plan: Long-Acting Injectable Cabenuva for HIV Management
This evaluation plan is designed to determine the effects of long-acting injectable Cabenuva on
the management of HIV in virally suppressed adults in a period of six months. It establishes
objective results and uses a mixed-methods approach to assess the adherence, viral suppression,
patient satisfaction, and healthcare utilization, which guarantees strong, evidence-based results.
Outcome Goals
The intervention leverages Cabenuva to optimize HIV care. The primary outcome goals are:
1. Better Medication Adherence: The increase in adherence rate, which is the
number of monthly injection appointments, by at least 20 percent relative to the baseline
rate of oral antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence, will ensure that treatment is
consistent.
2. Sustained Viral Suppression: Achieve viral suppression (viral load <200
copies/mL) in 90 percent of participants at six months, relative to historical oral ART
data, to delay disease progression.
3. Improved Patient Satisfaction: Achieve a 15 percent increase in validated survey
satisfaction scores, indicating greater convenience and ease of treatment and less stigma,
leading to long-term patient engagement.
4. Lower Healthcare Utilization: Reduce HIV-related emergency care or
hospitalization by 10 percent to enhance affordable care and quality.
These outcomes advance health promotion, care quality, and resource efficiency for a vulnerable
population.
Evaluation Plan
Data Collection Methods
The evaluation is based on a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the impact of the intervention.
Quantitative ones involve monitoring the monthly attendance of injection appointments through
electronic health records (EHRs), which will be compared to the baseline oral ART adherence
(percentage of doses taken) (Slama et al., 2023). The viral load is measured at baseline, month 3,
and month 6 using lab reports and compared with the data of oral ART clinics. EHRs track the
number of emergency visits and hospitalizations related to HIV when compared to past records
of oral ART. Patient satisfaction is measured using the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short
Form (PSQ-18) at baseline and month 6 (Marshall & Hays, 1994).
Qualitative measures involve semi-structured interviews with 12 participants at month 6 to
explore treatment benefits, barriers, and stigma perceptions. Nurse focus groups at month 6
gather feedback on implementation challenges, such as training or workflow, and patient
engagement, providing nuanced insights into operational feasibility.
Evaluation Tools
The EHR system ensures secure, HIPAA-compliant tracking of adherence, viral load, and
utilization data, facilitating real-time monitoring. The PSQ-18, a validated instrument,
standardizes satisfaction assessment across care domains (Marshall & Hays, 1994). Interview
guides, developed with nursing and psychology expertise, align with cultural considerations and
intervention objectives to ensure relevant and sensitive data collection.
Timeline
Evaluation activities are structured over six months. In month 1, baseline data (adherence, viral
load, satisfaction) are collected, and staff are trained on protocols to ensure consistency. Months
2–5 involve monthly monitoring of adherence, viral load, and utilization. In month 6, final viral
load tests, PSQ-18 surveys, patient interviews, and nurse focus groups are conducted, followed
by data analysis. Post-month 6, findings are disseminated to stakeholders to inform future scaling
and policy decisions.
Stakeholder Responsibilities
Stakeholders play critical roles in the evaluation. Patients provide survey and interview data to
shape outcomes. Nurses collect clinical metrics and offer implementation feedback.
Administrators oversee EHR data extraction and resource allocation. Payers evaluate
cost-effectiveness to guide coverage decisions, ensuring the intervention’s sustainability.
Analysis
Quantitative data are analyzed using SPSS, with t-tests (p < 0.05) to compare outcomes between
Cabenuva and oral ART groups. Qualitative data undergo thematic analysis to identify themes,
such as stigma reduction, triangulated with quantitative results for validity. Outcomes are
benchmarked against HRSA standards to contextualize success (U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 2025). Bias is mitigated by blinding analysts to patient identities and using
multiple coders for qualitative reliability.
References
Marshall, G. N., & Hays, R. D. (1994). The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short
Form (PSQ-18). RAND Corporation.
Slama, L., Porcher, R., Linard, F., Chakvetadze, C., Cros, A., Carillon, S., … & Molina, J.
M. (2023). Injectable long acting antiretroviral for HIV treatment and prevention:
perspectives of potential users. BMC Infectious Diseases, 23(1), 98.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2025). Health Resources and Services
Administration: HIV/AIDS Bureau. https://hab.hrsa.gov/
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9)
[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08071-9)
[https://hab.hrsa.gov/](https://hab.hrsa.gov/)
– Assignment 5: Reflection
– Address Generally Throughout