Theoretical Model Framework
Select the specific theoretical framework that you will use with your FNP project. Describe how the theory that you chose aligns with your capstone project. Include the following information:
Describe the key features of the selected theoretical framework/model. What are its major components?
â€¢ Identify specific research approaches appropriate for use with the theoretical model or framework and how it fits with your intended project.
o Does the model lend itself to quantitative or qualitative methods or both?
o What kind of quantitative/qualitative methods would be most appropriate? (Focus groups, interviews, pre/post-tests, record review, survey, etc.)
â€¢ Describe how the theoretical framework might be used to evaluate the program/project and critique how well the model fits the program or project.
o What aspects of the model works well and what aspects do not work?
Theoretical Model Framework
The current research initiative seeks to investigate ways for diabetes mellitus (DM) patients to manage their condition more effectively. The researcher wants to determine whether herbal regimens can aid in better DM management. There is information that okra is an essential herbal ingredient in various cultural-based medical practices (Chanchal et al., 2018). Thus, this evidence, alongside the researcher’s experience with the herb’s use in diabetes management, triggered the need for research. Hence, the study will address the PICOT question, “will adding 25 grams of Okra to 100 ml of water (crushed) ingested on an empty stomach daily, in addition to standard medication, manage blood sugar levels and lower HbA1c in persons with DM Type 1 or DM Type 2 in a three-month trial?” The study requires an elaborate theoretical model to enable one to address the research question and evaluate the project outcomes. Therefore, the paper develops an appropriate theoretical foundation (from an existing theory) to provide a solid foundation for conducting the research.
The chosen theory is the health belief model. Its six constructs provide psychological and behavioral explanations to patients’ responses to symptoms and their willingness to comply with clinicians’ guidelines (Boskey, 2022). First, perceived susceptibility entails the individual’s belief that they can develop the disease. This component is more crucial to type II patients since they develop the disease at a more advanced age and are less likely to accept their vulnerability. However, for any therapy (herbal or conventional) to be effective, they must acknowledge their susceptibility. DM patients must also accept that the disease could present acute symptoms (perceived susceptibility). The third and fourth constructs, perceived benefits and barriers, relate to the motivation to engage in health promotion interventions. For instance, the chance to enjoy a better quality of life (perceived benefit) is an essential motivator. Conversely, the presence of systematic challenges, such as informational misconceptions, unaffordability of treatment, etc., could dissuade a DM patient from following a clinician’s prescription. The fifth construct relates to cues to action. The cues could be internal or external and act as wake-up calls to get better. In DM, developing a blurry vision or witnessing a friend/relative suffer severe symptoms could serve as motivation to engage in DM management therapies. The final construct, self-efficacy, relates to patient empowerment. Since DM is a life-long condition, patients crave independence from healthcare settings.
The study will attempt to explain the results via at least one of these constructs. Typically, the researcher will compare how the intervention (routinely prescribed daily anti-diabetic therapy) and comparison (supplementary 25 grams fresh crushed Okra in 100 ml of water) fulfill each of these constructs. For instance, one could determine whether herbal medicine provides more self-efficacy to DM patients than conventional medicine. Furthermore, one can assess the contributors to DM mismanagement, such as inadequate patient education and cultural influence via the health belief model.
Specific Research Approaches
Since this study is experimental, one must engage two research approaches: descriptive and explanatory. The descriptive approach will be vital to expressing the primary outcomes, i.e., whether the intervention or comparison is more effective at managing blood glucose levels and reducing Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c). Next, the research will justify or rationalize these outcomes, hence the explanatory approach (George, 2021). The researcher will use observational data and feedback to determine why the intervention/comparison was effective or failed in delivering the expected outcomes.
The study’s layout requires mixed methods in data collection and analysis. The descriptive aspect demands a quantitative approach since the researcher will be documenting statistical changes in HbA1c and blood glucose levels (CDC, 2021). Furthermore, they could describe the participants’ demographics, including age, health literacy levels, and gender. Meanwhile, the explanatory approach needs a qualitative approach. The researcher will seek to understand why the intervention/control was effective. They will look for non-statistical data, including participants’ feedback. The quantitative component will utilize an experimental design since the researcher will control the independent variables (intervention and outcome). On the other hand, the qualitative research component will use observation and surveys.
The theoretical model will be instrumental in evaluating the program. The researcher will use the health belief model’s construct to assess the outcomes, as table 1 elaborates.
|Health Belief Model Constructs||Evaluation Question|
|Perceived susceptibility||How do cultural entities and health literacy affect DM patients’ view of the herbal intervention and the conventional therapeutic approach?|
|Perceived severity||What option would DM patients prefer when the DM symptoms are acute?|
|What advantages do the participants believe they can gain from using either the intervention/comparison?|
|Perceived barriers||What challenges do the participants report as impeding their use of the intervention/comparison?|
|Cues to action
|What drives DM patients to accept herbal or conventional medical management interventions?|
|Self-efficacy||Among the intervention and comparison, which allows DM patients more autonomy and empowerment?|
Table 1: Evaluation
Strengths and Limitations
The theoretical model works well in explaining why the herbal intervention could or could not work. It also allows one to integrate pre-existing concepts, such as cultural influences and health literacy, in understanding the status of each participants’ blood sugar management approach. However, the model cannot provide insights into the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics that could make the herbal medicine approach more effective than conventional therapy.
Boskey, E. (2022, Jan. 27). What Is the Health Belief Model? https://www.verywellmind.com/health-belief-model-3132721
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. (2021, Aug. 10). All About Your A1C. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/managing/managing-blood-sugar/a1c.html
Chanchal, D. K., Alok, S., Kumar, M., Bijauliya, R. K., Rashi, S., & Gupta, S. (2018). A Brief Review on Abelmoschus Esculentus Linn. Okra. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, 9(1), 58-66. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4c30/9a0e81094ad633d5eb2c7a8d0c4d35947445.pdf
George, T. (2021, Dec. 3). Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/explanatory-research/