| Course | NU298 Capstone |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Capstone paper |
| Length | About 1,110 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BSN (prelicensure) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU298 Unit 10
Shortening Fasting Before Procedures on a Medical Unit, Proposed but Not Yet Tested: A Capstone Paper Assembling Problem, Evidence and an Eight-Week Pilot Plan Into One Argument, With a Full Section on Its Limitations
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU298: Capstone
Unit 10 Capstone Paper
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The unit, baseline data and projections are composite and bracketed; nothing was changed on any unit, and the paper is a student capstone proposal.
Abstract
Hospitalized adults on a composite 30-bed medical unit were kept without clear liquids for a median of [13.5] hours before procedures that began, on average, after [1300]. Evidence suggests that fasting orders on medical services are frequent and often longer than needed, and that letting patients take clear fluids up to two hours ahead of planned procedures has not been shown to increase aspiration. This capstone proposes a three-part bundle, a fasting order check at the morning huddle, a call to confirm procedure times and clear liquids until two hours before for eligible patients, to be tested in an eight-week pilot. No change was made; results are projected, not observed.
Introduction and Problem
Fasting orders protect patients from aspiration during sedation, but when written from midnight for procedures in the afternoon, or for procedures that do not happen, they cause thirst, hunger, distress and sometimes low blood pressure. On the composite unit, [19] percent of fasts ended with the procedure postponed or canceled. Published studies of medical inpatients report similar patterns (Sorita et al., 2015, 2017).
Methods in Brief
CINAHL Complete and PubMed were searched for studies of fasting orders and fasting duration in hospitalized adults, with gray literature counted separately. Of [386] records, [11] were appraised and leveled using the Johns Hopkins approach (Dang et al., 2022). Full details appear in the search summary and annotated bibliography; this paper presents the conclusions.
What the Evidence Supports
1. On medical services, fasting orders are frequent and frequently overlong. Strength: moderate.
2. Trials in elective surgery found no rise in aspiration with shorter fluid fasts, and the current anesthesia guideline permits clear fluids up to two hours ahead (Brady et al., 2003; Joshi et al., 2023). Strength: strong in the surgical setting, more tentative for medical inpatients.
3. Long fasts cause psychological distress and physiological strain (Hepper et al., 2024). Strength: moderate for distress.
4. No study in the set tested a nurse-led change of this kind on a medical floor. Strength: weak.
The evidence is strong where it is least needed, in surgical trials, and weak where the unit most needs it, in whether nurses on a medical floor can make the change stick.
The Proposed Change
The bundle attaches to existing routines: the 0700 huddle reviews every fasting order, a [0900] call confirms procedure times, and an approved order set allows clear liquids until two hours before for patients without exclusions such as dysphagia, bowel obstruction, delayed gastric emptying or general anesthesia. The revised Iowa Model guides the sequence, with an eight-week pilot and then a team decision on whether to keep, change or drop the bundle (Iowa Model Collaborative, 2017).
Measures and Projected Results
Outcome: median clear-liquid fasting time and a thirst rating. Process: percent of fasting orders reviewed, confirmed and acted on. Balancing: delays or cancellations due to insufficient fasting and any aspiration events. If the bundle were delivered for about [80] percent of eligible patients, the projected median fast would fall to about [5] hours, based on typical procedure times. These are projections, not results.
Stakeholders and Their Concerns
Each group the change touches has a concern the proposal must answer. Providers worry about canceled procedures if patients drink too close to the time; the confirmed time and the two-hour rule address that. Procedure areas worry about extra phone calls; the call replaces the transport call they already receive. Nurses worry about workload; the huddle question adds about a minute per patient. Patients worry about whether drinking is safe; the bedside card explains the rule in plain words. Anesthesia worries about patients outside the guideline; the exclusions keep those patients on individual orders.
What Would Count as Failure
The pilot would be judged unsuccessful if fasting times did not fall, if process measures stayed below [50] percent after four weeks, or if any balancing measure showed harm. Any aspiration event during sedation in a patient who had clear liquids would stop the pilot for review, whatever the other results. Naming failure in advance protects patients and keeps the team from explaining away poor results after the fact.
Sustaining the Change if It Works
If the pilot succeeds, sustainment would rely on the order set default, a monthly audit of fasting times reported at the staff meeting and inclusion of the bundle in new-nurse orientation. Without these, changes that depend on habit tend to fade within months.
Limitations
The evidence leans on observational studies and quality improvement reports for the questions closest to this unit, and on older surgical trials for safety. Definitions vary: some studies measure total fasting, others only food or only fluids, which makes comparison difficult. The baseline is from four weeks of records on one composite unit and may not reflect other months. Results are projected rather than measured, so the paper cannot say whether the bundle works. The exclusions, chosen for safety, also limit how many patients benefit. Finally, the change depends on a provider group and procedure areas the student does not control; without their agreement, the bundle cannot run (Sparling & Yeh, 2023).
Recommendations, Graded by Evidence
Strong: allow clear liquids until two hours before elective sedated procedures for patients who meet guideline criteria. Moderate: review every fasting order daily for need and timing. Weak, to be tested: nurse-driven confirmation calls and order-set defaults as the way to deliver the change on a medical unit.
What I Learned Doing This Project
The project changed how I read orders. Before it, "NPO after midnight" looked like a clinical decision; now I see it as a default that may or may not fit the patient in front of me. I also learned that the hardest part of evidence-based practice is not finding evidence but matching it to a setting it was not studied in, and saying honestly where it stops. Writing the limitations section took longer than any other, and it is the section I would most want a nurse manager to read before approving a pilot.
Conclusion
The problem is real, measurable and partly within nursing's reach. The evidence supports the direction of change and leaves open whether this unit can deliver it. A short, measured pilot is the next honest step.
References
Brady, M. C., Kinn, S., Stuart, P., & Ness, V. (2003). Preoperative fasting for adults to prevent perioperative complications. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2003(4), Article CD004423. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004423
Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2022). Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines (4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.
Hepper, E. C., Wilson, J., Drinnan, M., & Patterson, J. M. (2024). Psychosocial impacts of being nil-by-mouth as an adult: A scoping review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 80(9), 3499-3515. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16100
Iowa Model Collaborative. (2017). Iowa Model of evidence-based practice: Revisions and validation. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(3), 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12223
Joshi, G. P., Abdelmalak, B. B., Weigel, W. A., Harbell, M. W., Kuo, C. I., Soriano, S. G., Stricker, P. A., Tipton, T., Grant, M. D., Marbella, A. M., Agarkar, M., Blanck, J. F., & Domino, K. B. (2023). 2023 American Society of Anesthesiologists practice guidelines for preoperative fasting: Carbohydrate-containing clear liquids with or without protein, chewing gum, and pediatric fasting duration: A modular update of the 2017 American Society of Anesthesiologists practice guidelines for preoperative fasting. Anesthesiology, 138(2), 132-151. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000004381
Sorita, A., Thongprayoon, C., Ahmed, A., Bates, R. E., Ratelle, J. T., Rieck, K. M., Devalapalli, A. P., Issa, M., Shah, R. M., Lalama, M. A., Wang, Z., Murad, M. H., & Kashiwagi, D. T. (2015). Frequency and appropriateness of fasting orders in the hospital. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 90(9), 1225-1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.07.013
Sorita, A., Thongprayoon, C., Ratelle, J. T., Bates, R. E., Rieck, K. M., Devalapalli, A. P., Ahmed, A., & Kashiwagi, D. T. (2017). Characteristics and outcomes of fasting orders among medical inpatients. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 12(1), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.2674
Sparling, J. L., & Yeh, D. D. (2023). Hungry for change: How best to implement and sustain reduced fasting times in hospitalized surgical patients? The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 49(11), 579-580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.07.001
What the NU298 Unit 10 assignment asks for
The final capstone unit usually asks students to assemble their project into a single scholarly paper with an abstract, introduction, problem, methods, evidence, proposed change, evaluation, limitations, recommendations and conclusion. Prompts commonly require the project's status to be stated clearly, since most capstones are proposals rather than completed changes. Instructors look for one consistent voice across work written in earlier units, methods summarized with detail referenced elsewhere, honest limitations and recommendations that match the strength of the evidence. Stakeholder considerations and plans for sustaining the change strengthen the paper. Capstone papers typically run six to eight pages in APA style, citing every source used across the project.
How the NU 298 Unit 10 example is put together
The paper opens with an abstract that states the project's status plainly, with a margin note. The introduction defines the problem with local and published figures. Methods are summarized in a paragraph. Four claims with strength ratings carry the evidence, and the highlighted sentence contrasts where evidence is strong and where it is weak. The proposed bundle and the Iowa Model pilot follow. Measures and projected results are labeled as projections, with a margin note. Sections on stakeholders, failure criteria and sustainment precede a full limitations section, with a margin note. Recommendations are graded by strength, the writer reflects on the project and the conclusion names the next step.
Reading the NU298 Unit 10 grading rubric
Capstone paper rubrics in NU 298 generally award points for clarity of the problem, quality of the evidence summary, appropriateness of the proposed change, evaluation design, limitations, recommendations and scholarly writing. Problem points depend on local data and a clear statement. Evidence points go to a concise, graded synthesis. Change points reward an intervention that follows from the evidence and fits the setting. Evaluation points are earned by outcome, process and balancing measures. Limitations points require an honest, specific section. Recommendation points go to grading each recommendation by its evidence. Writing points cover APA format and one consistent voice. Stating the project's status in the abstract usually earns credit for integrity.
Common NU298 Unit 10 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Capstone papers often lose points by presenting projected results as if they were outcomes, or by implying a change was made when it was only proposed. Another common error is stitching earlier assignments together without editing, leaving shifts in voice and repeated material. Some students write a short, generic limitations paragraph. Others make every recommendation sound equally certain. State the status in the abstract, edit earlier units into one voice, summarize methods briefly, label projections, give limitations a full section, grade recommendations by evidence and end with the next honest step. Ask a classmate to read the abstract alone and tell you what was done. Read the abstract last, after the paper is finished, and check that it matches.
Get an NU298 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
Capstone papers in Unit 10 may be implemented projects, proposals, integrative reviews or change proposals. Share the Unit 10 instructions and rubric, your earlier capstone pieces and whether anything was actually carried out. That work gets assembled into one argument, with the limitations stated in their own section rather than buried. First custom sample free, returned within 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More NU298 papers and BSN samples
- NU298 Unit 1: Capstone Topic Proposal
- NU298 Unit 2: Capstone Problem Statement
- NU298 Unit 3: Capstone Literature Search Summary
- NU298 Unit 4: Capstone Annotated Bibliography
- NU298 Unit 5: Capstone Evidence Synthesis
- NU298 Unit 6: Capstone Implementation Plan
- NU298 Unit 7: Role Transition Paper
- NU298 Unit 8: Professional Portfolio Piece
- NU298 Unit 9: Telephone Order Discussion Post
- NU263CL Unit 10: Sulfonylurea Hypoglycemia Case
- NU263 Unit 10: Early Warning Seminar Reflection
- NU104 Unit 10: Final Synthesis Paper
- NU245CL Unit 10: Closing Reflective Essay
NU298 Unit 10 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NU298 Unit 10 sample paper?
This page holds the full NU298 Unit 10 capstone paper on shortening fasting before procedures on a composite medical unit, with an abstract, graded evidence, a pilot plan, limitations and eight sources. We can help you assemble your own capstone into one argument.
Should a capstone paper say nothing was changed in NU298 Unit 10?
Yes, if the project is a proposal. Stating the status in the abstract keeps readers from mistaking projections for results.
How long is a BSN capstone paper?
Often six to eight pages in APA style, plus references, depending on the program's instructions.
What belongs in the limitations section?
Weaknesses in the evidence, differences in definitions, limits of the baseline data, projected rather than measured results and dependence on other departments.
Why grade recommendations by evidence?
It tells decision-makers which parts of the plan rest on strong evidence and which need testing, so they can judge the risk.