GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety

Class Resources

This page consists of Class Resources for use in the class.

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Fondahn, E., Lane, M., & Vannucci, A. (2016). Washington manual of patient safety and quality improvement. Wolters Kluwer. ISBN-13: 9781451193558

View Resource

GCU Library Nursing and Health Sciences Guide

Explore the GCU Library Nursing and Health Sciences Guide.

https://libguides.gcu.edu/Nursing

Journal of Patient Safety

Explore the Journal of Patient Safety in the GCU Library by clicking on the most recent issue or by using the keyword search function.

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=toc&SEARCH=01209203-202110000-00000.kc&LINKTYPE=asBody&LINKPOS=1&D=ovft

Journal for Healthcare Quality

Explore the Journal for Healthcare Quality in the GCU Library by clicking on the most recent issue or by using the keyword search function.

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=toc&SEARCH=01445442-202112000-00000.kc&LINKTYPE=asBody&LINKPOS=1&D=ovft

Integration of Faith, Learning and Work at Grand Canyon University

Read “Integration of Faith, Learning and Work at Grand Canyon University,” located on the Grand Canyon University website, to become familiar with the Christian worldview and how it may apply in the context of this course.

https://www.gcu.edu/sites/default/files/media/Documents/IFLW.pdf

LopesWrite

Refer to the LopesWrite webpage for guidance regarding assignments requiring submission to LopesWrite.

https://support.gcu.edu/hc/en

GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Topic 1: Continuous Quality Improvement Overview

Objectives:

Describe methods of continuous quality improvement (CQI) used in health care.
Discuss how CQI initiatives influence patient outcomes.
Describe ethical issues associated with CQI.
Describe factors that have an effect on the CQI process.

Summary of Current Course Content Knowledge

Apr 13-13, 2023

Academic engagement through active participation in instructional activities related to the course objectives is paramount to your success in this course and future courses. Through interaction with your instructor and classmates, you will explore the course material and be provided with the best opportunity for objective and competency mastery. To begin this class, review the course objectives for each Topic, and then answer the following questions as this will help guide your instructor for course instruction.

Which weekly objectives do you have prior knowledge of and to what extent?

Which weekly objectives do you have no prior knowledge of?

What course-related topics would you like to discuss with your instructor and classmates? What questions or concerns do you have about this course?

Topic 1 DQ 1

Apr 13-15, 2023

Describe ethical issues that are commonly associated with continuous quality improvement. As the Christian worldview promotes ethical behavior, explain how ethical principles informed by a Christian perspective might be beneficial for Christians and non-Christians alike regarding continuous quality improvement.

Sample Topic 1 DQ 1

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) in healthcare is important for improving systems, processes, and workflows to provide safe, efficient, and cost-effective care. CQI does not require as much ethical consideration as research studies do. Researchers typically have clear guidelines for ethical considerations, unlike CQI projects. The purpose of a research study is to gain new knowledge and is largely experimental and inquiry-driven, so researchers must obtain informed consent from the study participants because a new intervention is being tested. CQI projects utilize evidence-based research results from studies that have already been tested and proven effective. CQI is data-driven and aims to solve a problem using existing knowledge (as cited in Hall et al., 2020).

Many CQI projects are conducted without the patients involved being aware that they are being included in the project. For example, CQI projects that aim to improve National quality metrics such as the sepsis core measure, hospital readmissions, length of stay, DVT prophylaxis, etc., may implement new processes and interventions as a standard of care to improve compliance with these measures, and patients have no idea that their care is part of a CQI project. I am currently working with a CQI team to improve performance with the sepsis core measure and suggested process improvements include utilizing a sepsis screening tool in triage and adding sepsis protocol order sets. These interventions can be implemented as a standard of care for CQI without the need to inform patients.

There are ethical considerations for CQI, however, including ensuring that the process interventions do not impede patients’ autonomy and that no harm will result to the patients. CQI projects can place patients at risk or burden, may have unequal distribution of benefits for all participants, and can include conflicts of interest. A balance between risks and benefits must be achieved by limiting the risk of harm, ensuring confidentiality, and maximizing the benefits to patient care. The ethical considerations for CQI should include the purpose, patient confidentiality, informed consent, and the patient’s ability to withdraw from the intervention. When considering the purpose of the CQI, it may be useful to consider the Institute of Medicine’s six aims for safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. When conducting CQI, the need for informed consent should be considered as well (as cited in Hall et al., 2020). Using the example of the sepsis core measure CQI, when reviewing the records of care for sepsis patients to determine opportunities for improvement, the reviewers must ensure patient confidentiality by only reviewing the information necessary for the purpose of the CQI and ensuring that no patient information is left unsecured.

Healthcare staff conducting CQI projects should consider Christian Worldview principles when examining the ethical needs of the participants. Christian faith and values hold us to a higher standard, and we must lead by example. The metaparadigm of nursing includes the concepts of person, health, and environment and requires caring and respect for all people by ensuring that patients are cared for, that their culture and beliefs are considered, and the environment of care is clean, safe, and healing (Dockery, 2022).

Dockery, T. H. (2022). Bridging the racial divide: Nurses leading by Christ’s example. Journal of Christian Nursing, 39(3), 162-165. doi: 10.1097/CNJ.0000000000000966

Hall, S., Lee, V., & Haase, K. (2020). Exploring the challenges of ethical conduct in quality improvement projects. Canadian Oncology Nursing Journal, 30(1), 64-68. https://web-s-ebscohost-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=a618fcf4-a681-402f-8b2d-943c60e25da8%40redis

Topic 1 DQ 2

Apr 13-17, 2023

Using a minimum of two scholarly resources, compare and contrast two different methods of quality improvement used in health care.

Sample

Majlinda Brewton

Apr 17, 2023, 9:48 PM

Unread

According to National Library of Medicine Quality improvement (QI) methodology differs from that of clinical audit or empirical research (Adams, 2018). One of the methods that is talked about in this article is the Model for improvement.

This model is based upon three fundamental questions that frame the improvement efforts:

(i) What are we trying to accomplish? The aim of the improvement programme is defined with as much clarity as possible.
(ii) How will we know that a change is an improvement? Improvement is defined and measured in relation to a clear baseline or current state, for which specific metrics can be chosen.
(iii) What changes can we make that will result in improvement? Ideas for change based upon a clear understanding of the problem can be tested in a controlled fashion.

In a different article in the National Library of Medicine, the Board on Global Health, defined six methods widely used to improve quality. One of these methods mentioned is accreditation: Accreditation is essentially a risk-reduction strategy, one that works by applying standards and evaluating adherence to them. Each institution chooses its own path to meet the accreditation standard; in that way, the process is a vehicle for different quality improvement methods.

References,

Adams D. (2018). Quality improvement; part 1: introduction and overview. BJA education, 18(3), 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjae.2017.12.002

Board on Global Health; Institute of Medicine; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Improving Quality of Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2015 Nov 19. 3, Six Widely Used Methods to Improve Quality. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK333244/

GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Topic 1 Assignment: Continuous Quality Improvement Process

The purpose of this assignment is to discuss the purpose and use of the continuous quality improvement (CQI) process.

In a 1,000-1,250-word paper, address the following:

Explain the need for CQI in health care.
Describe methods of CQI used in health care.
Describe factors that have an effect on the CQI process.
Describe the overall impact that the CQI process has on staff.
Describe the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes.

This assignment requires a minimum of three scholarly resources.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Rubric Criteria – Graded

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

CQI in Health Care

18.2 points

Criteria Description

CQI in Health Care

Target

18.2 points

An explanation of why CQI is needed in health care is thorough.

Acceptable

16.74 points

An explanation of why CQI is needed in health care is detailed.

Approaching

16.02 points

An explanation of why CQI is needed in health care is present.

Insufficient

14.56 points

An explanation of why CQI is needed in health care is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of why CQI is needed in health care is not present.

Mechanics of Writing

6.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

6.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Acceptable

5.98 points

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

Approaching

5.72 points

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

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

10.4 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

Target

10.4 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Acceptable

9.57 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Approaching

9.15 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Insufficient

8.32 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Evidence

6.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

6.5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Acceptable

5.98 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

Approaching

5.72 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Factors That Affect the CQI Process

18.2 points

Criteria Description

Factors That Affect the CQI Process

Target

18.2 points

A description of the factors that affect the CQI process is thorough.

Acceptable

16.74 points

A description of the factors that affect the CQI process is detailed.

Approaching

16.02 points

A description of the factors that affect the CQI process is present.

Insufficient

14.56 points

A description of the factors that affect the CQI process is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the factors that affect the CQI process is not present.

Impact of CQI Initiatives of Patient Outcomes

18.2 points

Criteria Description

Impact of CQI Initiatives of Patient Outcomes

Target

18.2 points

A description of the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes is thorough.

Acceptable

16.74 points

A description of the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes is detailed.

Approaching

16.02 points

A description of the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes is present.

Insufficient

14.56 points

A description of the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the overall impact that CQI initiatives have on patient outcomes is not present.

Methods of CQI Used In Health Care

18.2 points

Criteria Description

Methods of CQI Used In Health Care

Target

18.2 points

A description of methods of CQI used in health care is thorough.

Acceptable

16.74 points

A description of methods of CQI used in health care is detailed.

Approaching

16.02 points

A description of methods of CQI used in health care is present.

Insufficient

14.56 points

A description of methods of CQI used in health care is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of methods of CQI used in health care is not present.

Impact of CQI Process on Staff

18.2 points

Criteria Description

Impact of CQI Process on Staff

Target

18.2 points

A description of the overall impact of the CQI process on staff is thorough.

Acceptable

16.74 points

A description of the overall impact of the CQI process on staff is detailed.

Approaching

16.02 points

A description of the overall impact of the CQI process on staff is present.

Insufficient

14.56 points

A description of the overall impact of the CQI process on staff is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the overall impact of the CQI process on staff is not present.

Format/Documentation

6.5 points

Criteria Description

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.

Target

6.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Acceptable

5.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

5.72 points

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

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

9.1 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

Target

9.1 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Acceptable

8.37 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

Approaching

8.01 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

Insufficient

7.28 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Total130 points

Topic 1 Resources

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 1 and 2 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Exploring the Challenges of Ethical Conduct in Quality Improvement Projects

Read “Exploring the Challenges of Ethical Conduct in Quality Improvement Projects,” by Hall, Lee, and Haase, from&#

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=141420294&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

The Effectiveness of Continuous Quality Improvement for Developing Professional Practice and Improving Health Care Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Read “The Effectiveness of Continuous Quality Improvement for Developing Professional Practice and Improving Health Care Outcomes: A

https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13012-020-0975-2

Wide-Scale Continuous Quality Improvement: A Study of Stakeholders’ Use of Quality of Care Reports at Various System Levels, and Factors Mediating Use

Read “Wide-Scale Continuous Quality Improvement: A Study of Stakeholders’ Use of Quality of Care Reports at Various System Levels, an

https://www.frontiersin.or

Topic 2: Data Measurement, Interpretation, And Variation

Objectives:

Identify effective strategies that promote a high reliability organization.
Describe nationally accepted quality measures and benchmarks in the practice setting.
Identify appropriate approaches to measuring quality data within a specified health care environment.

Topic 2 DQ 1

Apr 20-22, 2023

Describe three different nationally accepted quality measures and benchmarks in your chosen practice setting. Explain the significance of these measures and benchmarks. Identify appropriate approaches used when measuring quality data in your chosen practice setting.

Sample

Apr 22, 2023, 11:24 PM

Unread

Quality measures are guidelines for estimating the exhibition of medical services suppliers to really focus on patients and populaces. Quality measures can recognize significant parts of care like security, viability, idealness, and decency .Every quality measure centers around an alternate part of medical services conveyance, and together quality measures and quality estimation give a more exhaustive image of the nature of medical services.

Three different nationally accepted quality measures and benchmarks:

patient care and preventive screenings

One payer HealthPlus of Michigan offered different a few hints for suppliers hoping to further develop their HEDIS scores. In the first place, it is essential to figure out which patients might require a well-care evaluation by seeing holes in care records. Likewise, expanding admittance to medical care administrations by tending to any booking or arrangement issues is significant with regards to HEDIS quality execution.There are a lot of preventive consideration estimates that suppliers ought to meet including computing grown-up weight file levels, directing mammograms and pap tests, finishing vaccinations, and overseeing hypertension and cholesterol.

Authoritative Information

Throughout giving and paying to mind, associations produce authoritative information on the qualities of the populace they act as well as their utilization of administrations and charges for those administrations, frequently at the degree of individual clients. The information is accumulated from claims, experience, enlistment, and suppliers frameworks. Normal information components incorporate kind of administration, number of units, determination and technique codes for clinical administrations, area of administration, and sum charged and sum repaid.

Patient Survey

Study instruments catch self-revealed data from patients about their medical services encounters. Viewpoints covered remember reports for the consideration, administration, or treatment got and impression of the results of care. Studies are normally managed to an example of patients via mail, by phone, or by means of the Web.

Appropriate approaches used when measuring quality data in your chosen practice setting.

The utilization of value measures to help purchaser decision requires a serious level of information legitimacy and dependability. To ensure that correlations among suppliers and wellbeing plans are fair and that the outcomes address real execution, it is basic to gather information in a cautious, reliable way utilizing normalized definitions and systems.

Quality measures can be laid out by a specific medical services establishment or it can depend on measures created by government offices, confidential philanthropies and, surprisingly, some for-benefit organizations. When a medical care association puts forth its quality objectives it then, at that point, creates techniques to meet or surpass those objectives. Quality measures can incorporate the association’s capacity to give powerful, protected, ideal, patient-engaged and evenhanded consideration.

Lawrence, M. A., Pollard, C. M., & Weeramanthri, T. S. (2019). Positioning food standards programmes to protect public health: current performance, future opportunities and necessary reforms. Public Health Nutrition, 22(5), 912–926. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/S1368980018003786

LI Zhenghong, & QUAN Meiying. (2022). Quality Improvement Project in the Healthcare Field and Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence. Xiehe Yixue Zazhi, 13(6), 1074–1080. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.12290/xhyxzz.2022-0210

Noaman, A. Y., Ragab, A. H. M., Madbouly, A. I., Khedra, A. M., & Fayoumi, A. G. (2017). Higher education quality assessment model: towards achieving educational quality standard. Studies in Higher Education, 42(1), 23–46. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1034262

Topic 2 DQ 2

Apr 20-24, 2023

Using a minimum of two scholarly resources, identify two or three effective strategies that promote a high reliability organization. Explain why this is important.

Sample

Sarah Berg

Apr 24, 2023, 3:23 PM

Unread

High reliability organizations (HROs) are defined as organizations that “succeeded in avoiding catastrophes in an environment where normal accidents can be expected due to constant risk and complexity” (Fondahn, 2016). Some common examples of successful HROs are airlines and supply chains dealing with heavy machinery. In these settings the stakes are high where any sort of error can lead to severe consequences and even death. In this setting effective leadership, communication, and team members feeling comfortable sharing concerns is of the utmost importance (Fondahn, 2016).

One strategy for a hospital to promote a HRO is integrating patients and families into the team by utilizing a tool called Caring Out Loud. Caring Out Loud makes the care team narrate the care process aloud so that patients and families get educated and feel empowered to speak up and ask questions if something does not make sense. Once empowered patients and families can act as a safety check calling people out if they don’t see appropriate hand hygiene for infection prevention or when medications are reviewed, they can verify dosages or escalate if something seems wrong (Poore, 2018). Care Out Loud can be embraced by nurses working at the bedside and the whole healthcare team in daily rounding and hand off reports.

Another characteristic of HROs is a commitment to resilience and ability to bounce back. Unfortunately mistakes and incidents occur even in a successful HRO. One strategy to promote an HRO is how to respond to mistakes, “‘You can’t bounce back unless you know what went wrong: risk analysis, readiness reviews, all of the same things that we do,’” even in crisis settings like the COVID pandemic (Ward, 2021). To do this, hospitals should have strong frameworks on how to respond and analyze errors that occur. By having clear strategies in place when emergencies or crises happen, hospitals are set up for success by having the foundation on how to respond. Errors should be addressed and treated the same no matter the circumstances with the goal of achieving an entirely error-free organization.

References

Fondahn, E., Lane, M., Vannucci, A., & De Fer, T.M. (Eds.) (2016). The Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement. Wolters Kluwer.

Poore, J. (2018). Become a Next-Tier High-Reliability Organization. Healthcare Executive, 33(4), 60–61.

Ward, B. (2021). How to be a high reliability organization during a crisis. Healthcare Life Safety Compliance, 24(6), 1–3.

Topic 2 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 3 and 4 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Race Differences in Reported Near Miss Patient Safety Events in Health Care System High Reliability Organizations

Read “Race Differences in Reported ‘Near Miss’ Patient Safety Events in Health Care System High Reliability Organizations,” by Th

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=01209203-202112000-00127&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

Quality Measurement and Patient Outcomes in Inpatient Behavioral Health: Assessing the Current Framework

Read “Quality Measurement and Patient Outcomes in Inpatient Behavioral Health: Assessing the Current Framework,” by Nowlin, Brown

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=01445442-202112000-00005&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

How to Be a High Reliability Organization During a Crisis

Read “How to Be a High Reliability Organization During a Crisis,” by Ward, from Healthcare Life Safety Compliance (

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=150299586&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Become a Next-Tier High-Reliability Organization

Read “Become a Next-Tier High-Reliability Organization,” by Poore, from Healthcare Executive (2018).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=130312411&site=ehost-live&scope=site

ASCs Can Benchmark With Nursing Indicators

Read “ASCs Can Benchmark With Nursing Indicators,” from Same-Day Surgery (2018).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=129053140&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Measures

Read “Measures,” from the Resources page of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement website.

http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Measures/default.aspx

Translate Health Care Quality Data Into Usable Information

Read “Translate Health Care Quality Data Into Usable Information” (2016), located on the Agency for Healthcare Research and

https://www.ahrq.gov/tal

Topic 3: Quality Improvement Models

Objectives:

Apply the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model to a selected quality improvement topic.
Evaluate appropriate quality improvement models.

Topic 3 DQ 1

Apr 27-29, 2023

Discuss why we use quality improvement models. Provide a specific example to support your position.

Sample

Anya Kosakowska

Apr 29, 2023, 11:03 PM

Unread

Improvement is an observed change in a specific aspect of a service, such as efficiency, safety, or price. When aiming for change, a strategic framework of a model guides us into looking for root causes, testing and measuring interventions, and measuring outcomes. The continuous feedback evaluates the new and evolving process. Refinement lasts as long as it takes to have a standardized process in place.

CI models are used in practice improvement because they employ tested tools and strategies, such as value mapping tool, can guide the QI process to increase its effectiveness (Lavin & Vetter, 2022). The authors say that CI models help align project goals with those of the key executive stakeholders, which, in turn gives access to the needed physical and human resources. By analyzing the circumstances around the problem, creating measures, testing interventions, evaluating metrics, and overcoming barriers to implementation, EBP and CI together facilitate translation of evidence into practice (Lavin & Vetter, 2022).

Although the support of executive stakeholders may fuel the access to the resources to support the QI, the engagement of front-line workers is what makes success possible. Once the idea of change takes shape and more and more people get involved, the idea grows and becomes alive through creativity, competition, professional satisfaction, and pride in the work that is being done.

To illustrate, once a problem has been identified that clinical staff is unable to access correct physician information in the EHR, the director of the hospital where I work recruited a working group that constituted of IT, medical, and nursing staff to discuss the issue.

Plan: Exposing the underlying care delays, illustrating the workflow blocks, and discussing the desired goals provided some background to make plans.

Do: An electronic database of all physicians with their current and regularly updated contact phone numbers was created and served as a credentialing source for EHR.

Study: Physician and nurse feedback was collected to analyze subjective perceptions of the new process efficiency, and testing for other balance measures. Physicians reported “overcommunication” as a new problem.

Act: Nurses shortened messages, limiting it to brief one to two sentence summaries.

Reference:

Lavin, P. & Vetter, M. (2022). Using Lean Six Sigma to Increase the Effectiveness of an Evidence-Based Quality Improvement Program. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 37 (1), 81-86. doi: 10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000567.

Topic 3 DQ 2

Apr 27-May 1, 2023

Apply one of the quality improvement (QI) models you have read about to a QI issue in your professional life or based on your research. Identify one challenge that your chosen model could pose and how you would mitigate it. Do not use the PDSA cycle.

Sample

Earl Buzon

Apr 30, 2023, 9:36 PM

Unread

The Quality Improvement Models that are usually utilized in our Agency are the Root Cause Analysis (RCA). According to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (n.d), RCA is a structured facilitated team process to identify root causes of an event that resulted in an undesired outcome and develop corrective actions. The RCA process provides you with a way to identify breakdowns in processes and systems that contributed to the event and how to prevent future events. The purpose of an RCA is to find out what happened, why it happened, and determine what changes need to be made.

In my previous home health agency, as part of our QAPI compliance for home health, we identified that our hospital re admissions were increasing and above the national and state numbers. Management set up a meeting and agreed to do this as a quality improvement. To identify the contributing factors to hospital re admission. List of patients who were re admitted in the hospital in the first 30 days was provided and it was divided into teams, chart audits were done to identify if there were gaps in the care that were contributing to the incident. The reasons that came up was late start of care due to short staffing, patients were not frontloaded with visits (especially with the medically complex), appropriate disciplines were not recommended (documentation through OASIS that patient has a low functional score in ADLS, no referral to occupational therapy was made), no MD follow up set up after a week following discharge, especially with heart failure patients.

Furthermore, after identifying the factors, a plan of action was made to correct the gaps. Education was provided to clinicians on emphasis on frontloading of visits, In the Journal article by Lanham & Hinch (2017), it was recommended by the American College of Cardiology to front load on visits on heart failure patients, for disease condition monitoring. Another article from Mcalister et al. (2016), on the emphasis on MD follow ups after recent hospitalization or ED visits, this can help MD on the progression of the disease and for early interventions also.

Lastly, one of the challenges the quality models pose is more about the implementation of the action plan, especially involving leadership. One of the contributing factors is the low staffing, even if front-loading visits, it would be unrealistic since no staff is able to go for a visit. Management must change its current structure with its hiring process, and even reviewed its current rates to be able to stay competitive with other agencies. Frequent in services are being provided by Quality coordinators to remind clinicians on the action plan to prevent re admissions.

References:

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (n.d). Guidance for Performing Root Cause Analysis (RCA) with Performance Improvement Projects (PIPs). CMS.gov. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/provider-enrollment-and-certification/qapi/downloads/guidanceforrca.pdf

Lanham K. & Hinch B. (2017). AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH TO A SUCCESSFUL TRANSITION HOME: HEART FAILURE TRANSITIONS PROGRAM. JACC Journals 69 (11). https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/S0735-1097%2817%2935498-0

McAlister, F. A., Youngson, E., Kaul, P., & Ezekowitz, J. A. (2016). Early Follow-Up After a Heart Failure Exacerbation: The Importance of Continuity. Circulation. Heart failure, 9(9), e003194. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.116.003194

Topic 3 Assignment: Application Of The PDSA Model

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze the application of a commonly used quality improvement model. Choose a quality improvement topic that interests you and conduct research on your selected topic. Using your research, complete the “Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Template” to plan for the next step in the quality improvement process for your selected topic.

This assignment requires a minimum of two scholarly resources.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Attachments

HQS-610-RS-PDSA(Plan-Do-Study-Act)Tem

Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Template

Part 1: The purpose of Part 1 is for you to focus on your selected topic and start thinking about your plan. In 300-500 words, address the following key questions:

What are you trying to accomplish? (The aim statement).

How will you know if the change is an improvement? (What measures of success will you use?)

What changes can you make that will result in improvement? (Change concepts that will be tested).

Part 2: Using the questions in Part 2, complete the PDSA template below.

STEP: CYCLE:

PLAN

I plan to:

I hope this produces:

Steps to execute (include a minimum of five steps):

What would you anticipate/predict to observe (include a minimum of five observations)?

STUDY

Describe how you would measure the results and compare them to the prediction.

ACT

What might you conclude from completing one cycle of the plan?

Describe modifications for the next cycle based on what you learned.

References

This assignment requires a minimum of two scholarly resources. Cite these references below.

Rubric Criteria Graded

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Format/Documentation

5 points

Criteria Description

Target

5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Acceptable

4.35 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

3.95 points

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

Insufficient

3.7 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Mechanics of Writing

5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Acceptable

4.35 points

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

Approaching

3.95 points

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

Insufficient

3.7 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Aim Statement

10 points

Criteria Description

Aim Statement

Target

10 points

The aim statement thoroughly describes what is trying to be accomplished.

Acceptable

8.7 points

The aim statement clearly describes what is trying to be accomplished.

Approaching

7.9 points

The aim statement describes what is trying to be accomplished but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

7.4 points

The aim statement does not clearly describe what is trying to be accomplished.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The aim statement is not completed.

Act

15 points

Criteria Description

Act

Target

15 points

The response thoroughly describes a conclusion based on completing one cycle of the plan and modifications for the next cycle based on what was learned.

Acceptable

13.05 points

The response clearly describes a conclusion based on completing one cycle of the plan and modifications for the next cycle based on what was learned.

Approaching

11.85 points

The response describes a conclusion based on completing one cycle of the plan and modifications for the next cycle based on what was learned but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

11.1 points

The response does not clearly describe a conclusion based on completing one cycle of the plan or modifications for the next cycle based on what was learned.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not included.

Plan

15 points

Criteria Description

Plan

Target

15 points

The response thoroughly describes the plan, what should be produced, and at least five steps needed to execute the plan.

Acceptable

13.05 points

The response clearly describes the plan, what should be produced, and at least five steps needed to execute the plan.

Approaching

11.85 points

The response describes the plan, what should be produced, and least five steps needed to execute the plan but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

11.1 points

The response does not clearly or correctly describe the plan or what should be produced and includes less than five steps needed to execute the plan.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not included.

Study

15 points

Criteria Description

Study

Target

15 points

The response thoroughly describes how to measure the results and compare them to the prediction.

Acceptable

13.05 points

The response clearly describes how to measure the results and compare them to the prediction.

Approaching

11.85 points

The response describes how to measure the results and compare them to the prediction but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

11.1 points

The response does not clearly describe how to measure the results or compare them to the prediction.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not included.

15 points

Criteria Description

Target

15 points

The response thoroughly describes the anticipated or predicted observations and includes a minimum of five observations.

Acceptable

13.05 points

The response clearly describes the anticipated or predicted observations and includes a minimum of five observations.

Approaching

11.85 points

The response describes the anticipated or predicted observations and includes a minimum of five observations but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

11.1 points

The response does not clearly describe the anticipated or predicted observations and includes less than five observations.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not included.

Change Concepts

10 points

Criteria Description

Change Concepts

Target

10 points

The response thoroughly describes what changes can be made to result in an improvement and thoughtfully describes how change concepts will be tested.

Acceptable

8.7 points

The response clearly describes what changes can be made to result in an improvement and succinctly describes how change concepts will be tested.

Approaching

7.9 points

The response includes what changes can be made to result in an improvement and describes how change concepts will be tested but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

7.4 points

The response is incorrect or does not include what changes can be made to result in an improvement or describe how change concepts will be tested.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not included.

Measures of Success

10 points

Criteria Description

Measures of Success

Target

10 points

The response thoroughly describes that the change is an improvement and what measures of success will be used.

Acceptable

8.7 points

The response clearly describes that the change is an improvement and what measures of success will be used.

Approaching

7.9 points

The response describes that the change is an improvement and what measures of success will be used but is lacking specific details.

Insufficient

7.4 points

The response is incorrect or does not clearly describe that the change is an improvement and what measures of success will be used.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The response is not provided.

Total100 points

Topic 3 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapter 5 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Using Lean Six Sigma to Increase the Effectiveness of an Evidence-Based Quality improvement Program

Read “Using Lean Six Sigma to Increase the Effectiveness of an Evidence-Based Quality improvement Program,” by Lavin and Vetter,

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00001786-202201000-00014&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

Using the PDSA Model Correctly

Read “Using the PDSA Model Correctly,” by Connelly, from Medsurg Nursing (2021).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00008484-202101000-00013&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

Science of Improvement: Testing Changes

Read “Science of Improvement: Testing Changes,” located on the Institute for Healthcare Improvement website.

http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/ScienceofImprovementTestingChanges.aspx

Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Directions and Examples

Read “Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Directions and Examples,” from the Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit

https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/quality-resources/tools/literacy-toolkit/healthlittoolkit2-tool2b.html

Section 4: Ways to Approach the Quality Improvement Process

Read “Section 4: Ways to Approach the Quality Improvement Process,” from The CAHPS Ambulatory Care Improvement Guide (20

https://www.ahrq.gov/cah

Topic 4: Consumer Satisfaction, Reimbursement Programs, And Value-Based Purchasing

Objectives:

Discuss the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement.
Analyze the impact of linking payment to quality improvement.
Describe the intent and outcomes of public reporting.

Topic 4 DQ 1

May 4-6, 2023

Discuss the value of complete and accurate documentation. Provide an example from the news or from your professional experience when documentation has proven to be the key aspect in a legal case review. What laws and policies govern proper documentation practices and who establishes these practices?

Sample

Anice Thomas

May 5, 2023, 9:23 PM

Read

The importance of accurate and complete documentation is a high priority in healthcare to improve patient safety and quality of care. It is the most efficient way for clinicians to communicate the patient’s story, what they were suffering with and how it was treated, which in turn helps any future clinicians or medical teams to evaluate a patient’s treatment plan (Jorgensen & Kollerup, 2022). Proper documentation is part of continuity of care, regardless of the type of medical treatment. Accurate and timely documentation is necessary for reimbursement purposes. Missing vital information causes unnecessary delays and possibly even denial of reimbursements and benefits. Required nursing documentation has risen exponentially, with charting taking more nursing time than direct patient care.

Patient skin assessment is an important part of every admission. Our institutional policy is to have two registered nurses to assess the skin, take photographs of the wound and upload them to the electronic health record (EHR) with accurate documentation of staging of wound with measurements. Appropriate wound care measures are instituted based on findings including wound care nurse and nutrition consult. We had incidents where patients came with deep tissue injury and ended up in stage 2 wounds, maybe due to refusing to be repositioned because of pain or fractures etc. Healthcare facilities can be sued for hospital acquired pressure injuries. According to Kaucher et al. (2022)” litigation arising from pressure ulcers and skin breakdown constitutes an increasingly large percentage of liability claims against hospitals, subacute care facilities, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing facilities, and assisted living facilities.” The best way to reduce the risk of skin breakdown and related claims is to provide and document appropriate care. From a legal and risk management standpoint, documentation of each element should be accurate, timely, and complete per organizational protocol. Accurate documentation is vital for reporting daily events, planning and evaluating patient care, facilitating communication, organizing nursing practice, safeguarding professional accountability, and ensuring regulatory standards (Kaucher et al., 2022).

Regulatory agencies oversee different components of the healthcare system, from individual providers to entire hospitals. The agencies include federal, state agencies, and private regulators. The Department of health and human services (DHHS) implements most of the federal healthcare regulatory infrastructure through component agencies include Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are involved in patient safety and quality reporting Fondahn et al., 2016). All of these have the objective to improve patient safety, by assisting with the measurement and description of events, the design of interventions, the reporting of measures and outcomes, or the proposal of norms. These regulatory agencies provide the foundation for improving quality of care and protecting patients by enforcing its standards and performance objectives.

Fondahn, E., Lane, M., Vannucci, A., & De Fer, T.M. (2016). The Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement. Wolters Kluwer.

Kaucher, J., Bohnenkamp, S., Lou Kennedy-Evans, K. & Bohnenkamp, M. (2022). Legal documentation in Pressure Ulcer/Injury Cases, MEDSURG Nursing, 31 (2), 77-81.

Trainer, N. (2023). Critical Care Nurse, 43 (1), 10-11. doi: 10.4037/ccn2023527.

Topic 4 DQ 2

May 4-8, 2023

Explain variance and its common causes in patient care process and outcomes, including costs. Analyze the effects of linking quality improvement measures to payment structures. Discuss the effect that various payment structures have on quality outcomes.

Sample

Dorielys Valentin Ortiz

May 8, 2023, 10:25 PM

Unread

Managing variance is crucial to quality improvement. Quality improvement is largely affected by two types of variance – common-cause variance and special-cause variance. Common-cause variation is random variation present in stable healthcare processes (Bowen & Neuhauser, 2013). Special-cause variation is an unpredictable deviation resulting from a cause that is not an intrinsic part of a process (Bowen & Neuhauser, 2013). Variation in a process is normal and expected. Over a given period, it is essentially unavoidable. The tactic to manage variation depends on the main concern and perspectives of the QI leadership and the intended generalizability of the results of the improvement effort.

Unnecessary clinical variation leads to increased costs, as seen in many surgical procedures and the encompassing episodes of care (Ardoin & Malone, 2019). Factors that influence and raise costs include the use of unnecessary preoperative testing, physician preference decisions that increase implant costs or extend operating-room time, and a lack of standardized postoperative care that leads to prolonged lengths of stay and inappropriate use of post-acute resources (Ardoin & Malone, 2019). Failure to standardize the coordination of care can also lead to unnecessary ER visits and hospital readmissions. Due to cost related issues like the ones mentioned above a there have been a few payments linked to quality programs like;

The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) is a Medicare value-based purchasing program that encourages hospitals to improve communication and care coordination to better engage patients and caregivers in discharge plans and, in turn, reduce avoidable readmissions (CMS, 2023).
The Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program adjusts hospitals’ payments based on their performance on 4 domains that reflect hospital quality: (1) the clinical outcomes domain, (2) the person and community engagement domain, (3) the safety domain, and (4) the efficiency and cost reduction domain (CMS, 2023).
The Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program is a Medicare value-based purchasing program that reduces payments to hospitals based on how they perform on measures of hospital-acquired conditions (CMS, 2023).
The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model encourages physicians, hospitals, and post-acute care providers to work together to improve quality of care for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement inpatient surgeries (CMS, 2023).

I personally think that linking payment methods for quality outcomes is a good concept. These methods ensure that hospitals and clinics start to focus on delivering quality care rather than just care. The effect of these are mostly positive because it ensures better care and safety for patients. Of course, these can sometimes limit what providers can do without approval from insurance, delaying care and increasing length of stay. But overall if we compare these there are more good effects than bad.

References

Ardoin, D., & Malone, J. (2019). Reducing Clinical Variation to Drive Success in Value-Based Care (Part 1). Healthcare Financial Management Association, https://www.hfma.org/operations-management/care-process-redesign/reducing-clinical-variation-to-drive-success-in-value-based-care0/.

Bowen, M., & Neuhauser, D. (2013). Understanding and managing variation: three different perspectives. Implementation Science, 8 (Suppl 1), S1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-S1-S1.

CMS. (2023). Linking quality to payment. Retrieved from Data.CMS.gov: https://data.cms.gov/provider-data/topics/hospitals/linking-quality-to-payment#comprehensive-cjr-model

Topic 4 Assignment: The Importance Of Public Reporting

The purpose of this assignment is to examine how publicly reported data influence internal quality improvement initiatives.

Identify a specific health care organization of your choice. Review its Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores and Hospital Acquired Infections (HAIs) reports.

In a 1,250-1,500-word paper, discuss your findings on the HCAHPS scores and HAIs for the health care organization you selected. Include the following in your paper:

Describe the health care organization you have selected.
Discuss the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process.
Discuss how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of your selected organization compare to national benchmarks.
Discuss the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement.
Describe the intent and outcomes of public reporting.
Discuss what actions leadership could take at your selected organization based on the reported HCAHPS and HAIs data.

This assignment requires four to six scholarly resources.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Leadership Actions Based on HCAHPS and HAIs Data

18 points

Criteria Description

Leadership Actions Based on HCAHPS and HAIs Data

Target

18 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is thorough.

Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is detailed.

Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is present.

Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the actions that leadership could take at the selected organization based on the reported HCAPHS and HAIs data is not present.

Health Care Organization

15 points

Criteria Description

Health Care Organization

Target

15 points

A description of the selected health care organization is thorough.

Acceptable

13.8 points

A description of the selected health care organization is detailed.

Approaching

13.2 points

A description of the selected health care organization is present.

Insufficient

12 points

A description of the selected health care organization is present, but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the selected health care organization is not present.

Evidence

7.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

7.5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Acceptable

6.9 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

Approaching

6.6 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

Insufficient

6 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Role of Consumer Satisfaction

18 points

Criteria Description

Role of Consumer Satisfaction

Target

18 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is thorough.

Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is detailed.

Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is present.

Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the role of consumer satisfaction in quality improvement is not present.

Intent and Outcomes of Public Reporting

18 points

Criteria Description

Intent and Outcomes of Public Reporting

Target

18 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is thorough.

Acceptable

16.56 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is detailed.

Approaching

15.84 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is present.

Insufficient

14.4 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the intent and outcomes of public reporting is not present.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

Target

10.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Acceptable

9.66 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

Approaching

9.24 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

Insufficient

8.4 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Mechanics of Writing

7.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

7.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Acceptable

6.9 points

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

Approaching

6.6 points

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

Insufficient

6 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

12 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

Target

12 points

Acceptable

11.04 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Approaching

10.56 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Insufficient

9.6 points

Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Format/Documentation

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Target

7.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Acceptable

6.9 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

6.6 points

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

Insufficient

6 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Role of HCAHPS and HAIs

18 points

Criteria Description

Role of HCAHPS and HAIs

Target

18 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is thorough.

Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is detailed.

Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is present.

Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of the role of HCAHPS and HAIs in creating quality indicators and how they contribute to the quality improvement process is not present.

HCAHPS and HAIs Data

18 points

Criteria Description

HCAHPS and HAIs Data

Target

18 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is thorough.

Acceptable

16.56 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is detailed.

Approaching

15.84 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is present.

Insufficient

14.4 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of how the HCAHPS and HAIs data of the selected organization compare to national benchmarks is not present.

Total150 points

Topic 4 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 6, 8, 9, and 10 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Paying for Performance Improvement in Quality and Outcomes of Cardiovascular Care: Challenges and Prospects

Read “Paying for Performance Improvement in Quality and Outcomes of Cardiovascular Care: Challenges and Prospects,” by Husai

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=146570368&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

Ready or Not, Quality-Based Reimbursement Is Here

Read “Ready or Not, Quality-Based Reimbursement Is Here,” by Siemienczuk, from Dermatology Times (2018).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=132756274&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs)

Read “Current HAI Progress Report,” from the Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) page located on the CDC website.

https://www.cdc.gov/hai/data/portal/progress-report.html

HCAHPS: Patients’ Perspectives of Care Survey

Read “HCAHPS: Patients’ Perspectives of Care Survey,” by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) (2019), locate

https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/HospitalHCAHPS.html

The HCAHPS Survey – Frequently Asked Questions

Read “The HCAHPS Survey – Frequently Asked Questions,” by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), locate

https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/Downloads/HospitalHCAHPSFactSheet201007.pdf

Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program

Read “Hospital Value Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program” located on the CMS website.

https://qualitynet.cms.gov/inpatient/hvbp

HCAHPS and Hospital VBP

Explore the HCAHPS and Hospital VBP page of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) website.

https://www.hcahpsonline.org/en/hcahps-and-hospital-vbp/

Hospital Compare

Explore the Hospital Compare page of the Medicare website to complete the Topic 4 assignment. Click the hospital button and enter th

https://www.med

Topic 5: Patient Safety

Objectives:

Evaluate tools that have been developed to manage patient safety issues and educate health care providers.
Describe best practices that promote patient, community, and provider safety in the practice setting.
Analyze factors that create a culture of safety and a just culture.

Topic 5 DQ 1

May 11-13, 2023

Evaluate three different tools developed to manage patient safety issues and educate health care providers. Describe one strength and one limitation of each.

Topic 5 DQ 2

May 11-15, 2023

Using personal experience or research, describe best practices that are in place that promote patient, community, and provider safety in the practice setting. In doing so, be sure to include methods to identify and prevent verbal, physical, and psychological harm to patients and staff.

Topic 5 Assignment: Just Culture And Culture Of Safety

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to examine factors that contribute to a just culture and a culture of safety and how they are implemented within a health care organization. Identify a health care organization that uses a just culture and culture of safety. Research how a just culture and culture of safety are implemented within that organization.

In a 1,000-1,250-word paper, analyze the factors that create a just culture and culture of safety within your selected organization. Include the following in your paper:

A description of the health care organization you selected.
An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and culture of safety within the selected health care organization.
An evaluation of how the mission and vision of your identified organization align with the factors that create a just culture and culture of safety, including two or three examples.

This assignment requires a minimum of two scholarly sources. If the necessary information is not readily available on the organization’s website, you may need to set up an interview with someone at the organization.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Format/Documentation

6.5 points

Criteria Description

Target

6.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Acceptable

5.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

5.72 points

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

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Health Care Organization

28.6 points

Criteria Description

Health Care Organization

Target

28.6 points

A description of the health care organization is thorough.

Acceptable

26.31 points

A description of the health care organization is detailed.

Approaching

25.17 points

A description of the health care organization is present.

Insufficient

22.88 points

A description of the health care organization is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the health care organization is not present.

Analysis of Factors of Just Culture and Culture of Safety

29.9 points

Criteria Description

Analysis of Factors of Just Culture and Culture of Safety

Target

29.9 points

An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety within the selected health care organization is thorough.

Acceptable

27.51 points

An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety within the selected health care organization is detailed.

Approaching

26.31 points

An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety within the selected health care organization is present.

Insufficient

23.92 points

An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety within the selected health care organization is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An analysis of the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety within the selected health care organization is not present.

Evidence

6.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

6.5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Acceptable

5.98 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

Approaching

5.72 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

10.4 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

Target

10.4 points

Acceptable

9.57 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Approaching

9.15 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Insufficient

8.32 points

Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

9.1 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

Target

9.1 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Acceptable

8.37 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

Approaching

8.01 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

Insufficient

7.28 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Evaluation of Mission and Vision Alignment to Just Culture and Culture of Safetyy

32.5 points

Criteria Description

Evaluation of Mission and Vision Alignment to Just Culture and Culture of Safety

Target

32.5 points

An evaluation of how the mission and vision of the identified organization aligns with the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety is thorough. The evaluation includes three or more examples that thoroughly support the evaluation.

Acceptable

29.9 points

An evaluation of how the mission and vision of the identified organization aligns with the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety is detailed. The evaluation includes at least two examples that reasonably support the evaluation.

Approaching

28.6 points

An evaluation of how the mission and vision of the identified organization aligns with the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety is present. The evaluation includes at least two examples that somewhat support the evaluation.

Insufficient

26 points

An evaluation of how the mission and vision of the identified organization aligns with the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety is present but lacks detail or is incomplete. The evaluation includes one example.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An evaluation of how the mission and vision of the identified organization aligns with the factors that create a just culture and a culture of safety is not present.

Mechanics of Writing

6.5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

6.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Acceptable

5.98 points

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

Approaching

5.72 points

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

Insufficient

5.2 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Total130 points

Topic 5 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 11, 12, and 18 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Just Culture Is Not Just Culture – It’s Shifting Mindset

Read “Just Culture Is Not ‘Just’ Culture – It’s Shifting Mindset,” by Foslien-Nash and Reed, from Military Medicine

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=146220200&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

Advancing the Culture of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read “Advancing the Culture of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement,” by MacGillivray Methodist DeBakey Cardiovas

https://lopes.idm.oclc.or

Topic 6: Classification And Reduction Of Medical Errors

Objectives:

Evaluate methods used to analyze and classify medical errors.
Describe evidence-based practices in evaluating errors and good catches.
Evaluate the use of technology in the reduction of medical errors.

Topic 6 DQ 1

May 18-20, 2023

Discuss what other methods are used beyond root cause analysis to analyze and classify medical errors. How do these methods compare to root cause analysis? Which one would you be more likely to choose if you needed to investigate a medical error made on your unit? Why?

Topic 6 DQ 2

May 18-22, 2023

Describe the difference between a medical error and a good catch. Use a personal example or find a current example in the news to illustrate your point. Discuss which evidence-based practices are used when evaluating errors and good catches.

Topic 6 Benchmark – Technology and Medical Errors

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze the use of technology in the reduction of medical errors.

Identify a specific medical error and one of the types of technology that has been developed to aid in ensuring patient safety by reducing such errors. Create a PowerPoint presentation of 12-14 slides (not including title slide and reference slides) on the benefits and challenges of the technology for the example you have identified. Include the following in your presentation:

Describe your chosen medical error and the technology that has been used to address it.
Explain how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes.
Discuss how you would monitor the success of the identified technology in improving quality and safety outcomes.
Describe three pros and cons (each) of the use of this technology in your example and in general (e.g., reliability, accessibility, training required, cost, clinician judgement, etc.).
Provide an example or develop a situation in which the use of this technology could still lead to a medical error.

This assignment requires a minimum of three peer-reviewed references.

Include a title slide, references slide, and comprehensive speaker notes.

Refer to the resource, “Creating Effective PowerPoint Presentations,” located in the Student Success Center, for additional guidance on completing this assignment in the appropriate style.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:

MSN Health Care Quality and Patient Safety

6.1: Identify, mitigate, and monitor quality and safety opportunities.

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

Chosen Medical Error and Technology (B)

16.5 points

Criteria Description

(C6.1a)

Target

16.5 points

A description of the medical error and the technology used to address it is thorough.

Acceptable

15.18 points

A description of the medical error and the technology used to address it is detailed.

Approaching

14.52 points

A description of the medical error and the technology used to address it is present.

Insufficient

13.2 points

A description of the medical error and the technology used to address it is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the medical error and the technology used to address it is not present.

Technology Assistance in Improving Quality and Safety Outcomes (B)

16.5 points

Criteria Description

(C6.1b)

Target

16.5 points

An explanation of how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes is thorough.

Acceptable

15.18 points

An explanation of how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes is detailed.

Approaching

14.52 points

An explanation of how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes is present.

Insufficient

13.2 points

An explanation of how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how the identified technology assists in improving quality and safety outcomes is not present.

Monitoring Success (B)

16.5 points

Criteria Description

(C6.1c)

Target

16.5 points

A discussion of how success of the identified technology would be monitored for improving quality and safety outcomes is thorough.

Acceptable

15.18 points

A discussion of how the success of the identified technology would be monitored for improving quality and safety outcomes is detailed.

Approaching

14.52 points

A discussion of how the success of the identified technology would be monitored for improving quality and safety outcomes is present.

Insufficient

13.2 points

A discussion of how the success of the identified technology would be monitored for improving quality and safety outcomes is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A discussion of how the success of the identified technology would be monitored for improving quality and safety outcomes is not present.

Pros and Cons of Technology

16.5 points

Criteria Description

Pros and Cons of Technology

Target

16.5 points

Three pros and three cons of the use of the technology are thoroughly explained.

Acceptable

15.18 points

Three pros and three cons of the use of the technology are explained in detail.

Approaching

14.52 points

Three pros and three cons of the use of the technology are present.

Insufficient

13.2 points

Three pros and three cons of the use of the technology are present but lack details or are incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Three pros and three cons of the use of the technology are not present.

Medical Error

16.5 points

Criteria Description

Medical Error

Target

16.5 points

An example or situation where the use of this technology still could lead to a medical error is thorough.

Acceptable

15.18 points

An example or situation where the use of this technology still could lead to a medical error is detailed.

Approaching

14.52 points

An example or situation where the use of this technology still could lead to a medical error is present.

Insufficient

13.2 points

An example or situation where the use of this technology still could lead to a medical error is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An example or situation where the use of this technology still could lead to a medical error is not present.

Presentation of Content

15 points

Criteria Description

Presentation of Content

Target

15 points

Content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.

Acceptable

13.8 points

Content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information, exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Persuasive information from reliable sources is included.

Approaching

13.2 points

Presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other.

Insufficient

12 points

Content is vague in conveying a point of view or does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some persuasive information is included.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Content lacks a clear point of view or logical sequence of information. Little persuasive information is included. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

Layout

15 points

Criteria Description

Layout

Target

15 points

Layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

Acceptable

13.8 points

Layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

Approaching

13.2 points

Layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts from or does not enhance readability.

Insufficient

12 points

Layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting, with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read, with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

Speaker Notes

15 points

Criteria Description

Speaker Notes

Target

15 points

Speaker notes are extremely thorough and include substantial relevant supporting details.

Acceptable

13.8 points

Speaker notes are complete and include relevant supporting details.

Approaching

13.2 points

Speaker notes are included but lack relevant supporting details.

Insufficient

12 points

Speaker notes are incomplete or incorrect.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Speaker notes are not included.

Language Use and Audience Awareness

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.

Target

7.5 points

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

Acceptable

6.9 points

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

Approaching

6.6 points

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

Insufficient

6 points

Some distracting inconsistencies in language or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Mechanics of Writing

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.

Target

7.5 points

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.

Acceptable

6.9 points

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

Approaching

6.6 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.

Insufficient

6 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Documentation of Sources

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

Target

7.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of errors.

Acceptable

6.9 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Approaching

6.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Insufficient

6 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total150 points

Topic 6 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 13, 14, and 29 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Innovative Technology System to Prevent Wrong Site Surgery and Capture Near Misses: A Multi-Center Review of 487 Cases

Read “Innovative Technology System to Prevent Wrong Site Surgery and Capture Near Misses: A Multi-Center Review of 487 Cases,” by

https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.lopes.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC7644953/

Implementation and Benefits of a Good Catch Program

Read “Implementation and Benefits of a Good Catch Program,” by Barnes, Naves, and Ju, from Radiation Therapist

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=146978261&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

Use Errors With Health Care Technologies: An Inconvenient Truth

Watch “Use Errors With Health Care Technologies: An Inconvenient Truth,” by Harrington, from AACN Advanced Critical

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=135107619&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

Adverse Event Reporting and Root Cause Analysis

Read “Adverse Event Reporting and Root Cause Analysis,” by Abreu, from American Nurse Today (2021).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=150942384&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Studying Institutional Situational Awareness Through Anonymous Incident Reporting

Read “Studying Institutional Situational Awareness Through Anonymous Incident Reporting,” by Kurapati, Boyd, King, and Awad, from

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00019514-202007000-00006&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

Medication Safety in Emergency Medical Services: Approaching an Evidence-Based Method of Verification to Reduce Errors

Read “Medication Safety in Emergency Medical Services: Approaching an Evidence-Based Method of Verification to Reduce Errors,

https://journals-sagepub-co

Topic 7: Risk Management

Objectives:

Analyze the impact of human factors on clinical decision making in relation to patient safety.
Describe the importance of national patient safety initiatives for improving patient outcomes in health care.
Discuss how interprofessional teamwork and communication affect patient safety.

Topic 7 DQ 1

Describe what is meant by the term human factors. Take a minute to think critically about your own strengths, limitations, and values. Now think about your team members. How do these areas have an impact on clinical decision making in relation to patient safety? Be specific. Provide an example of flawed clinical decision making and potential legal ramifications.

Topic 7 DQ 2

Interprofessional teamwork and communication affect patient safety. Provide an example from your professional life of ineffective communication. Next, describe appropriate handoff communication practices. Discuss how proper communication and teamwork made a difference.

Topic 7 Assignment: National Patient Safety Initiatives

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze national patient safety initiatives. Review the National Patient Safety Goals and select one initiative that you are familiar with or have seen in practice. In a 750-1,000-word paper, analyze the national patient safety initiative you have selected. Include the following in your paper:

A description of the national patient safety initiative you have selected that you are familiar with or have seen in practice and what the setting would be for that initiative.
A description of how this initiative is supported by evidence.
An analysis of how the nation is trending toward this goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care. Provide one or two examples to support your position.

This assignment requires a minimum of three scholarly resources.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Rubric Criteria

Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All

National Patient Safety Initiative

22 points

Criteria Description

National Patient Safety Initiative

Target

22 points

A description of the national patient safety initiative and the health care setting is thorough.

Acceptable

20.24 points

A description of the national patient safety initiative and the health care setting is detailed.

Approaching

19.36 points

A description of the national patient safety initiative and the health care setting is present.

Insufficient

17.6 points

A description of the national patient safety initiative and the health care setting is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the national patient safety initiative and the health care setting is not present.

Evidence to Support Initiative

23 points

Criteria Description

Evidence to Support Initiative

Target

23 points

A description of how the initiative is supported by evidence is thorough.

Acceptable

21.16 points

A description of how the initiative is supported by evidence is detailed.

Approaching

20.24 points

A description of how the initiative is supported by evidence is present.

Insufficient

18.4 points

A description of how the initiative is supported by evidence is present but lacks detail or is incomplete.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of how the initiative is supported by evidence is not present.

Analysis of How the Nation Is Trending Toward the Goal

25 points

Criteria Description

Analysis of How the Nation Is Trending Toward the Goal

Target

25 points

An analysis of how the nation is trending toward the goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care is present and thorough. The analysis includes one or two examples that thoroughly demonstrate a connection to the national patient safety initiative.

Acceptable

23 points

An analysis of how the nation is trending toward the goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care is present and detailed. The analysis includes one or two examples that demonstrate a connection to the national patient safety initiative.

Approaching

22 points

An analysis of how the nation is trending toward the goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care is present. The analysis includes one or two examples that somewhat demonstrate a connection to the national patient safety initiative.

Insufficient

20 points

An analysis of how the nation is trending toward the goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care is present but lacks detail or is incomplete. The analysis includes one or two examples that somewhat demonstrate a connection to the national safety patient initiative, but there is no connection to the national patient safety initiative.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

An analysis of how the nation is trending toward the goal and its importance for improving patient outcomes in health care is not present.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

7 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

Target

7 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Acceptable

6.44 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

Approaching

6.16 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

Insufficient

5.6 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

8 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

Target

8 points

Acceptable

7.36 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Approaching

7.04 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Insufficient

6.4 points

Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Evidence

5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Acceptable

4.6 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

Approaching

4.4 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

Insufficient

4 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Mechanics of Writing

5 points

Criteria Description

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

Target

5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Acceptable

4.6 points

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

Approaching

4.4 points

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

Insufficient

4 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Format/Documentation

5 points

Criteria Description

Target

5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

Acceptable

4.6 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

Approaching

4.4 points

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

Insufficient

4 points

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

Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Total100 points

Topic 7 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapters 15-17 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Enhancing Communication to Improve Patient Safety and to Increase Patient Satisfaction

Read “Enhancing Communication to Improve Patient Safety and to Increase Patient Satisfaction,” by Burgener, from Th

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00126450-202007000-00004&LSLINK=80&D=ovft

It’s Time to Consider National Culture When Designing Team Training Initiatives in Healthcare

Read “It’s Time to Consider National Culture When Designing Team Training Initiatives in Healthcare,” by Rice, Daouk-&#

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/s-time-consider-national-culture-when-designing/docview/2514958402/se-2?accountid=7374

Educate Students About Human Factors in Acute Care

Read “Educate Students About Human Factors in Acute Care,” by Williams, from Clinical Teacher (2019).

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=138609733&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8333196&groupid=main&profile=ehost

Adapting Cognitive Task Analysis to Investigate Clinical Decision Making and Medication Safety Incidents

Read “Adapting Cognitive Task Analysis to Investigate Clinical Decision Making and Medication Safety Incidents,” by Russ, Militel

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://ovidsp.ovid.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=01209203-201909000-00004&D=ovft&PDF=y

National Patient Safety Goals

Explore the current National Patient Safety Goals, located on The Joint Commission website.

https://www.jointcommission.or

Topic 8: Health Information Technology And Quality Improvement

Objectives:

Discuss the link between national trends in health information technology initiatives and quality improvement.
Explain how clinical decision support systems impact quality improvement and patient safety.

Topic 8 DQ 1

Discuss the link between national trends in health information technology (HIT) initiatives and quality improvement. How does this affect patient safety? Provide two specific examples.

Topic 8 DQ 2

Explain how clinical decision support systems (CDSS) impact quality improvement and patient safety. Discuss both the strengths and opportunities for improvement of a CDSS that you are familiar with from your professional setting or research.

Topic 8 Resources

Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All

Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement

Read Chapter 7 in Washington Manual of Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.

View Resource

Optimizing Health IT to Improve Health System Performance: A Work in Progress

Read “Optimizing Health IT to Improve Health System Performance: A Work in Progress,” by Rudin, Fischer, Damberg,&

https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S2213076420300828

Primary Care Practices’ Abilities and Challenges in Using Electronic Health Record Data for Quality Improvement

Read “Primary Care Practices’ Abilities and Challenges in Using Electronic Health Record Data for Quality Improvement,” by Cohen

https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/docview/2023386147?accountid=7374

Big Data Analytics: Understanding Its Capabilities and Potential Benefits for Healthcare Organizations

Read “Big Data Analytics: Understanding Its Capabilities and Potential Benefits for Healthcare Organizations,” by Wang, Kung, and

https://www-sciencedirect-com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0040162516000500

Health Care in 2019: Five Key Trends to Watch

Read “Health Care in 2019: Five Key Trends to Watch,” by DeVore, from Health Affairs (2019).

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20190109.546126/full/

Will E-Monitoring of Policy and Program Implementation Stifle or Enhance Practice? How Would We Know?

Read “Will E-Monitoring of Policy and Program Implementation Stifle or Enhance Practice? How Would We Know?” by Conte and Hawe, f

https://doi.org/10.3389/

Get Instant Help on WhatsApp

GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety

GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Topic 1: Continuous Quality Improvement Overview

Topic 1 DQ 1

Topic 1 DQ 2

GCU HQS 610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Topic 1 Assignment: Continuous Quality Improvement Process

Rubric Criteria – Graded

Topic 1 Resources

Topic 2: Data Measurement, Interpretation, And Variation

Topic 2 DQ 1

Topic 2 DQ 2