Infections from burn wounds are a critical patient safety and quality of care issue as they impact the healing and recovery process, including burn patients. Wound dressing procedures expose skin wounds to infections, particularly hospital-acquired infections, because of the delicate nature of the skin as the largest organ in the body (Riza et al., 2024). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2024) provides comprehensive guidelines for disinfecting and sterilizing equipment to prevent and control hospital-acquired infections. Ayomikun and Olaolorunpo (2024) observe that burn injuries are a major public health concern due to the associated mortality rates in the world. The risk of escalation of the burns increases if nurses do not develop and use appropriate interventions, including practice guidelines on sterilization of equipment and guidelines on medical administration and other aspects, such as aseptic techniques to reduce infections. Therefore, infections are a major issue for burn victims as they hinder fast recovery and healing, necessitating interventions to protect the health of the population affected by such events.

The targeted population is adult burn patients who are at increased susceptibility to infections. Nosocomial infections are a significant issue for this population since burns damage the skin barrier and weaken the immune system. Studies by Yang et al. (2024), Mozafari et al. (2024), and Tan et al. (2022) show that adult burn wound patients have increased susceptibility to infections because of an impaired immune system, loss of skin barrier, extended hospitalization period, and a favorable environment for bacteria to grow. As such, the functional capabilities of adult patients with burn wounds are low, especially those who sustain severe burns. Tan et al. (2024) assert that provider and system factors also increase the risk for nosocomial infections and even sepsis post-burns for adult patients. The article is categorical that this population is at increased risk for infections, underscoring the importance of provider activities like having guidelines and protocols on infection control to reduce the risk for the patients due to the delicate nature of their skin.

The proposed intervention is having a policy on sterilization and decontamination of equipment, including dressing equipment, and a guideline policy. Infection prevention policy on sterilization and decontamination of burn wounds is an effective nursing intervention that reduces infection as nurses implement evidence-based protocols to enhance patient care quality. Infection prevention and control (IPC) in burns is essential as infections are a leading cause of mortality and morbidity for such patients (Yang et al., 2024). Sterilization and decontamination entail initial debridement that is followed by gentle cleansing using a mild antiseptic solution and applying sterile gauze or washcloths. Additionally, the policy should mandate healthcare providers, like nurses, to wear appropriate personal protective equipment that is sterilized to reduce and prevent the transmission of infections to the burn patient. Ji et al. (2024) observe that having the right interventions to control infections is essential to get better outcomes for burn patients since infection treatment is a core aspect of quality care. Therefore, the proposed intervention underscores the importance of evidence-based protocols and policy guidelines to reduce adverse outcomes among such patients.

Standard protocols and policies to control infections for burn patients exist. However, a majority of these policies and protocols do not lead to better outcomes, as witnessed by a rise in mortality and morbidity emanating from infections, especially nosocomial infections. The effectiveness of such protocols as hand hygiene, wound care management, environmental control, and antimicrobial stewardship provides effective approaches to managing wounds among burn patients (McWilliams et al., 2021). However, additional measures, as proposed in this paper, including policy guidelines in the trauma facility, can improve the overall effectiveness of the current practices. Policy guidelines ensure that nurses and other providers adhere to the mandates, reducing the associated risk and ensuring that patients have better outcomes (Ariyo et al., 2024). For instance, antimicrobial stewardship can lead to resistance and make the antibiotics ineffective. Therefore, the proposed intervention offers a sustainable approach that entails a holistic perspective to lower nosocomial infections while improving the quality of care for the burn patient.

The expected outcome from the proposed intervention is to prevent and reduce the risk of infection in burn patients in the facility. As illustrated, burn patients are susceptible to infections because of loss of skin barrier, compromised immunity, and possible longer stays in hospitals’ trauma centers.  Again, burns provide a favorable environment for bacterial growth for these patients. Therefore, implementing the selected intervention will lower the rate of nosocomial infections, reduce the length of stay, and improve the quality of life for the burn patient. It will also enhance recovery and healing, ensuring that the body recovers its skin barrier and impaired immune system (Ariyo et al., 2024). Additionally, the intervention will ensure that the facility has a sustainable approach to burn wound care and management.

The time frame for implementing this intervention is six months. Additionally, the evaluation of the proposed intervention will start from the inception of the project and continue throughout its implementation. At every stage of the implementation, the project team will evaluate the attainment of goals and objectives set, determine gaps, and execute corrective measures to improve the sustainability of the project.

List applicable population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline.

An applicable population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline is missing.

The population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline is inaccurate or incomplete.

An applicable population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline is present but lacks detail.

An applicable population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline is mostly detailed.

An applicable population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and timeline is thorough and accurate.

Finalize a PICOT question.

A finalized PICOT question is missing.

A finalized PICOT question is inaccurate or incomplete.

A finalized PICOT question is present but lacks detail.

A finalized PICOT question is mostly detailed.

A finalized PICOT question is thorough and accurate.

Provide a problem statement for the student’s PICOT question.

A problem statement is missing.

A problem statement is inaccurate or incomplete.

A problem statement is present but lacks detail.

A problem statement is mostly detailed.

A problem statement is thorough and accurate.

Describe the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities.

A description of the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities, is missing.

A description of the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities, is inaccurate or incomplete.

A description of the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities, is present but lacks detail.

A description of the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities, is mostly detailed.

A description of the population of interest, including its functional and problem-solving capabilities, is thorough and accurate.

Describe a nursing intervention used to address the problem.

A description of a nursing intervention used to address the problem is missing.

A description of a nursing intervention used to address the problem is inaccurate or incomplete.

A description of a nursing intervention used to address the problem is present but lacks detail.

A description of a nursing intervention used to address the problem is mostly detailed.

A description of a nursing intervention used to address the problem is thorough and accurate.

Compare the nursing intervention to what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting.

A comparison of the nursing intervention versus what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting is missing.

A comparison of the nursing intervention versus what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting is inaccurate or incomplete.

A comparison of the nursing intervention versus what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting is present but lacks detail.

A comparison of the nursing intervention versus what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting is present but lacks detail.

A comparison of the nursing intervention versus what is currently in place at the student’s practicum site/selecting setting is thorough and accurate.

Describe the expected outcome for the selected intervention.

A description of the expected outcome for the selected intervention is missing.

A description of the expected outcome for the selected intervention is inaccurate or incomplete.

A description of the expected outcome for the selected intervention is present but lacks detail.

A description of the expected outcome for the selected intervention is mostly detailed.

A description of the expected outcome for the selected intervention is thorough and accurate.

Describe the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome.

A description of the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome is missing.

A description of the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome is inaccurate or incomplete.

A description of the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome is present but lacks detail.

A description of the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome is mostly detailed.

A description of the time frame for implementing the proposed intervention and evaluating the outcome is thorough and accurate.

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is superficial or incorrect.

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are clearly considered.

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.