Describe the characteristics of a professional doctorate and doctoral capstone project.

/in /by

Instructions

Critically analyze each of the identified organizational challenges you identified in Week 3 and compare them with Capella University’s criteria for an approvable doctoral capstone topic and project and with elements needed for the application of EBP improvement. Then, make a case for focusing on one challenge as the best opportunity for EBP improvement in a potential doctoral capstone project.

Requirements

The assignment requirements, outlined below, correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, note the additional requirements for document format, length, and supporting evidence.

  • Describe the characteristics of a professional doctorate and doctoral capstone project.
    • Compare professional activities and roles for individuals with a DHA or DrPH degree compared to a PhD degree.
    • Delineate the differences and similarities between a DHA or DrPH capstone project and a PhD dissertation.
    • Describe three major characteristics of a doctoral capstone project.
  • Critically analyze the potential of evidence-based improvement to mitigate the negative impact of each of the three identified organizational challenges.
    • Describe the appropriateness of applying the EBP process to mitigate the negative impact of the identified challenges.
    • Summarize the quality of available research evidence to support a potential project focused on mitigating the negative impact of the identified challenges.
    • Describe how the EBP process could facilitate improvements that mitigate the negative impact of the challenges in a short period of time.
  • Determine the extent to which a project focused on mitigating the negative impact of each of the three organizational challenges meets Capella University criteria for a doctoral capstone project.
    • Outline what a doctoral capstone project is and what it is not, according to Capella University criteria for a doctoral capstone project.
    • Describe how the application of existing knowledge to mitigate the negative impact of the challenges aligns with your program and specialization and contributes to your field.
    • Summarize Capella University criteria that would be met by a doctoral capstone project focused on mitigating the negative impact of the challenges.
  • Argue for the potential success and approval of a doctoral capstone project focused on the evidence-based improvement of one challenge the organization is facing.
    • Describe how the evidence-based improvement of one challenge meets professional doctorate, EBP, and university standards and criteria.
  • Write concisely and directly, using active voice.
  • Apply APA style and formatting to scholarly writing.

Additional Requirements

  • Format: Format your paper using APA style. Use the APA Style Paper Template [DOCX]. An APA Style Paper Tutorial [DOCX] is also provided to help you in writing and formatting your paper. Be sure to include:
    • A title page and reference page. An abstract is not required.
    • A running head on all pages.
    • Appropriate section headings.
  • Length: Your paper should be 3–4 pages in length, not including the title page and reference page.
  • Supporting evidence: Cite at least two current and relevant peer-reviewed studies. Provide in-text citations and references in APA format.iscussion:

    1. Access and affordability: This is simultaneously an environment where we have made exceptional strides in turning cancer into a chronic disease and adding years to life. At the same time, we still struggle with access and affordability. On the affordability front, the cost of the therapies including the drugs and immunotherapy has implications for access. With such a prevalent and horrible disease as cancer, ideally you would want treatment to be 100% accessible. We need a healthcare system that is dramatically improved in quality, dramatically improved in access, and dramatically improved in affordability and sustainability for patients, doctors, employers, and the country. Quality, access, and cost are major challenges that are going to require transformative change. With access, one in four Americans will defer care because of cost reasons. One in three Americans will not take prescription drugs because of cost. One of the major causes of personal bankruptcy is healthcare. We have a highly inefficient system. Out of the $3.5 trillion that we spend on healthcare in this country, which is close to 19% of our gross domestic product, about $700 billion to $900 billion is wasteful care.

    2. Geographic barriers: In our case, we get a lot of patients who come from all over the country and all over the world. We get many patients who come to us after they have tried treatment at their local hospital. It’s a major journey for these patients to travel. By offering telehealth and partnering with local providers, we are trying to bridge this gap. But just because you have wonderful new therapies and protocols at facilities like ours, it doesn’t mean that everyone can overcome the geographical barriers to access them.

    3. Time: There might be a clinical trial that is in its infancy but it’s so close to unlocking an important scientific discovery that I would wish that I could get it to patients today instead of a year from now. Time is also a factor in catching disease early and preventing disease. Just like with cardiac care and diabetes, there are lots of things that can prevent cancer, up to 50% of cancer is preventable. Through prevention and very early detection and diagnosis, we can stop cancers at the cellular level before they progress to more complex diseases. Often, the treatment side gets the most attention, more dollars, and more resources. Treatment is very important, but we need to pay as much attention to devoting dollars and resources to prevention and diagnosis.

    References

    National Cancer Policy Forum; Board on Health Care Services; Institute of Medicine. Delivering Affordable Cancer Care in the 21st Century: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2013 May 20. CURRENT CHALLENGES. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK202475/

    van de Haar J, Hoes LR, Coles CE, et al: Caring for patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era. Nat Med 26:665-671, 2020 [Erratum: Nat Med 26:1146, 2020]

     

     

     

    Discussion Response:

    Nicely summarized post.  I agree with you that the cost of drugs and/or treatment within the United States has become unreasonable and is resulting in patients having to make decisions between food on their table or medicine for their disease.  Rajkumar (2020) found that global spending on prescription drugs averaged $1.3 trillion in 2020, with the United States making up $350 billion of the total.  Globally, spending on prescription drugs is expected to increase 3%-6% year on year.  Hunter (2011) reported that the average price of a life-saving oncology drug can cost $100,000-$150,000 annually in the US.

    Reducing the price of prescription drugs has no easy solution, especially in markets like the United States where there are no government controlled price caps or value-based pricing requirements.  Fundamental changes to global and United States (US) policies are necessary if drug prices are lowered, but careful consideration must be taken to appropriately compensate pharmaceutical companies for the costs associated with research and development.  It is an extremely delicate balance that requires transparency and input from all key stakeholders.

    References

    Hunter, J.  (2011).  Challenges for pharmaceutical industry: new partnerships for sustainable human health.  The Royal Society, 369, 1942.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0377.

    Rajkumar, S. V.  (2020).  The high cost of prescription drugs: causes and solutions [Editorial].  Blood Cancer Journal, 10(71).  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-020-0338-x.