NURS 5051 Module04 Week08 Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies

NURS 5051 Module04 Week08

The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies

 

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
  • Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”
  • Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.

 

ORDER YOUR PLUGIARISM FREE PAPER HERE TODAY !!

 

For information about annotated bibliographies, visit https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographies

The Assignment: (4-5 pages not including the title and reference page)

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed.

Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography.

NURS 5051 Module04 Week08
NURS 5051 Module04 Week08

Be sure to address the following:

  • Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
  • Include an introduction explaining the purpose of the paper.
  • Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
  • In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.
  • Use APA format and include a title page.
  • Use the Safe Assign Drafts to check your match percentage before submitting your work.

By Day 7 of Week 8

 

  • Submit your completed Assignment.
  • Submission and Grading Information

 

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

  • Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK8Assgn+last name+first initial”

 

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

·   Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.
·   Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.

Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%)

The responses accurately and clearly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

The responses accurately and thoroughly summarize in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.

Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses.

Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%)

The responses identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.

Accurate examples are provided which support the responses provided.

Points Range: 60 (60%) – 67 (67%)

The responses vaguely or inaccurately identify 4 or less peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment.

The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described that is vague or inaccurate.

Examples provided to support the responses are vague or inaccurate.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 59 (59%)

The responses vaguely and inaccurately identify less than 4 peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment, or are missing.

The responses vaguely and inaccurately summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described, or are missing.

Examples provided to support the responses are vague and inaccurate, or are missing.

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:

Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.
Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Total Points: 100

 

ORDER YOUR PLUGIARISM FREE PAPER HERE TODAY !!

 

SOLUTION

The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies: A Review of Literature

Healthcare informatics ushered in a new era of artificial intelligence and novel technology, making healthcare delivery much easier, better, and sophisticated. The breakthrough report To Err Is Human, published and issued by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in 1999, was essential in driving this shift away from traditional manpower-based methods to healthcare service delivery (Palatnik, 2016). According to this estimate, around 98,000 individuals died each year in the United States as a result of preventable medical errors at the time. The goal of this research is to look at four cases that show how clinical systems can help improve outcomes and efficiency.

Background

As a result, one of the IOM report’s multiple suggestions was that technology be used to reduce the incidence of human mistake. This indicates that it was recognized that technology will play a key role in facilitating the efficacy of healthcare interventions and increasing patient outcomes. Following the publication of that report, many healthcare organizations began to recognize the value of having electronic patient records and medical information. Legislation has also begun to target healthcare organizations’ implementation of health information systems (HIS). Healthcare providers and institutions purchased and installed electronic health records (EHR) systems from available vendors to demonstrate acceptance and compliance (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2017).

Four Current Scholarly Studies

The four studies that were obtained from databases published in the recent five years are listed below. They are peer-reviewed research articles that highlight the significance of clinical systems in improving patient outcomes and facilitating the efficiency of healthcare practitioners and the interventions they deploy. It’s worth mentioning that all of the clinical systems investigated in these studies are technologically based. They are:

  1. Alotaibi, Y., & Federico, F. (2017). The impact of health information technology on patient safety. Saudi Medical Journal, 38(12), 1173–1180. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.12.20631
  2. Fedele, D.A., Cushing, C.C., Fritz, A., Amaro, C.M., & Ortega, A. (2017). Mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth. JAMA Pediatrics, 171(5), 461. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0042
  • Islam, M.M., Poly, T.N., & Li, Y.-C. (2018). Recent advancement of clinical information systems: Opportunities and challenges. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 27(01), 083–090.https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667075
  1. Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D., Leak, L.D., Tieman, L.A., & Manworren, R.C.B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.002

Alotaibi, Y., & Federico, F. (2017). The impact of health information technology on patient safety. Saudi Medical Journal, 38(12), 1173–1180. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.12.20631

The goal of Alotaibi and Federico (2017)’s research was to find evidence that clinical systems based on technology are important in improving outcomes and facilitating efficacy. They discovered overwhelming evidence in support of at least 14 clinical systems that are often utilized by various providers to improve performance and the quality of care they offer to patients. Their strong counsel, on the other hand, is that the provider must carefully consider which clinical system to employ and from which vendor to obtain it. This is because their research demonstrated that not all vendors’ ostensibly new clinical systems are evidence-based. Patient data management systems (PDMS), computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems, electronic medication administration record (eMAR), electronic medical record (EMR), patient care portals, bar code medication administration (BCMA), and clinical decision support (CDS) systems are some of the clinical systems for which they found evidence of a role in improving outcomes and increasing efficacy (Alotaibi & Federico, 2017). Proper patient information management (by PDMS), effective and error-free drug prescription and medication administration (by COPE and BCMA), and other improvements to outcomes and efficiency were demonstrated in this study. The most essential lesson learned is that, when properly handled, technology can be a huge help in providing high-quality patient care.

Fedele, D.A., Cushing, C.C., Fritz, A., Amaro, C.M., & Ortega, A. (2017). Mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth. JAMA Pediatrics, 171(5), 461. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0042

Fedele et al. (2017) is the other study to look at. Its goal was to determine the efficacy of clinical systems based on mobile phone technology for delivering interventions such as health education and prevention. This was a robust meta-analysis that found that mobile phone-based clinical systems have a vital role in improving outcomes and enhancing service delivery efficiency (Fedele et al., 2017). The noticeable changes in the habits of the young (behavioral and lifestyle modification) as a result of the mobile phone interventions used demonstrated an improvement in outcomes and efficiency. The most essential takeaway is that, as smartphones become virtually an unavoidable need in today’s world, their reach can be leveraged to have clinical systems that are effective, efficient, patient-centered, timely, equitable, and safe.

Islam, M.M., Poly, T.N., & Li, Y.-C. (2018). Recent advancement of clinical information systems: Opportunities and challenges. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 27(01), 083–090. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667075

Islam et al. (2018) is the third one to look at. Its goal was to determine the importance of clinical information systems (CIS) in promoting better patient outcomes and healthcare worker efficiency. The outcomes were unmistakable. Clinical information systems have been demonstrated to be effective in decreasing clinical and medication errors that would otherwise be made by healthcare personnel such as doctors and nurses (Islam et al., 2017). The reduction in occurrences of medical errors, which was the focus of the IOM report stated in the introduction – To Err Is Human – demonstrated the improvement in results and efficiency. The takeaway is that technology, in the form of novel healthcare systems, can help to reduce avoidable mortality.

Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D., Leak, L.D., Tieman, L.A., & Manworren, R.C.B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.002

Rao-Gupta et al. (2018) conducted the fourth and final study on interactive patient care clinical systems. Rao-Gupta et al. (2018) claim that interactive patient care clinical systems are beneficial in increasing treatment outcomes. They were able to demonstrate that this method might greatly enhance medication order administration. Better outcomes and efficiency were demonstrated as a result of the automation and integration of the medication systems (Rao-Gupta et al., 2018). As in the other research papers listed above, well-designed clinical systems promote health satisfaction and clinician efficacy.

 

Conclusion

In the delivery of medicine, clinical information systems are becoming increasingly vital. This is because they are becoming increasingly important in creating efficiency and providing high-quality treatment. As a result, modern healthcare technology is and will continue to be an important aspect of healthcare delivery. Well-designed clinical systems have been shown to improve patient outcomes and practitioner performance in peer-reviewed research.

 

References

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ] (2018). Six domains of health care quality. https://www.ahrq.gov/talkingquality/measures/six-domains.html

Alotaibi, Y., & Federico, F. (2017). The impact of health information technology on patient safety. Saudi Medical Journal, 38(12), 1173–1180. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.12.20631

Fedele, D.A., Cushing, C.C., Fritz, A., Amaro, C.M., & Ortega, A. (2017). Mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth. JAMA Pediatrics, 171(5), 461. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0042

Islam, M.M., Poly, T.N., & Li, Y.-C. (2018). Recent advancement of clinical information systems: Opportunities and challenges. Yearbook of Medical Informatics, 27(01), 083–090. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667075

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K.G. (2017). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge, 4th ed. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Palatnik, A. (2016). To err is human. Nursing Critical Care, 11(5), 4. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCN.0000490961.44977.8d

Rao-Gupta, S., Kruger, D., Leak, L.D., Tieman, L.A., & Manworren, R.C.B. (2018). Leveraging interactive patient care technology to improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing, 19(3), 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.002

Wang, Y., Kung, L., & Byrd, T.A. (2018). Big data analytics: Understanding its capabilities and potential benefits for healthcare organizations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.12.019

 

Get 20% off your first purchase

X